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


Jun 24, 1996 05:59 PM
by Alan

This concludes the REPLY to the President's Letter of November 1908
begun as CWL03a.TXT.  The various sections have now been collated and
will be available shortly on request as a single file, CWL03.TXT

Mention is made in this section of "The Cipher Letter," which was, not
surprisingly, separately printed in its entirety for those who wished to
avail themselves of its contents.  This will CWL04.TXT.  It is quite
short.  A.B. (Ed.)


The Documents.

On p. 6 Mrs. Besant writes, quoting a previous letter of hers (the
   "Simla Letter"):

"On June 7th [1906] I received an account of the acceptance by Mr.
   Leadbeater before the Committee of the facts alleged in the

As this might give the unknowing reader the impression that Mrs.
   Besant had not had previously before her any of the "facts
   alleged in the evidence," or any knowledge of the "acceptance by
   Mr. Leadbeater" of them, to make it clear we recite the facts.

In February, 1906, Mrs. Besant herself was the first to receive the
   charges and original evidence on which they were based, from
   America, drawn up and laid before her by the two chief officials
   of the Section (in their private capacity), and also by the two
   chief officers of the E.S. there, in a letter dated January 25.

Mr. Leadbeater, to whom also a copy had been forwarded, was then
   with Mrs. Besant at Benares. After consultation with her, Mr.
   Leadbeater wrote a letter of confession and excuse (dated
   February 27) to the then American General Secretary; and Mrs.
   Besant also sent a letter to the chief officer of the E.S.  in
   which she repeated Mr. Leadbeater's excuses, but expressed
   disagreement with his teaching; in view of Mr. Leadbeater's
   promise to abstain from this teaching in future, however, she
   did not favour the "searching investigation" demanded, and said
   she saw no reason why he should be withdrawn from activity.

So far all had been kept as silent as possible. Mr. Leadbeater's
   letter and Mrs. Besant's reply being entirely unsatisfactory,
   the Executive Committee of the American Section then felt
   themselves compelled to lay the whole matter officially before
   Colonel Olcott, the President-Founder of the Society, who
   promptly called together an Advisory Committee consisting of the
   then Executive Committee of the British Section, to which
   Section Mr. Leadbeater belonged. The members of this Committee
   were: Mr. Sinnett, Dr. Nunn, Mr. Mead, Mrs. Stead, Miss Ward,
   Miss Spink, Mrs. Hooper, Mr. Bertram Keightley, Mr. Thomas, and
   Mr. Glass. There were also present Mr. Burnett, as
   representative and delegate of the Executive Committee of the
   American Section, and M. Bernard, the representative of the
   Executive Committee of the French Section.

The documents submitted by the American Executive consisted of: (1)
   The charges and evidence already laid before Mrs.  Besant; (2)
   Mr. Leadbeater's letter of confession and excuse; (3) rebuttal
   statements of the boys to some of the statements made by Mr.
   Leadbeater in his letter. and (4) corroborative evidence and
   testimony in two further cases obtained after sending to Mrs.
   Besant the first evidence on which the charges were brought.

The original charges, based on the evidence of two boys, were:

FIRST: That he is teaching young boys given into his care habits of
   self-abuse and demoralizing personal practices.

SECOND: That he does this with deliberate intent and under the
   guise of occult training or with the promise of the increase of
   physical manhood.

THIRD: That he has demanded, at least in one case, promises of the
   utmost secrecy.

It was with regard to the rebuttal evidence (3) and the further
   corroborative evidence (4), that Mr. Leadbeater said at the
   beginning of the inquiry, as quoted by Mrs. Besant (p.7):

"I have only just now seen anything at all of the documents, except
   the [read "that"] first letter."

This "first letter" is the first lengthy document containing the
   charges and evidence laid before Mrs. Besant in February.
   Below, in parallel columns, will be found Mrs. Besant's version
   of what took place, together with the full text of the Minutes
   from which she is supposed to be quoting.

{1996 editorial note: in preparing this text for Internet use, the
   parallel columns cannot be placed as such, and the text of these
   two columns follow as separate paragraphs - A.B.}


As to the "evidence," he stated at the time: "I have only just now
   seen anything at all of the documents, except the first letter";
   on his hasty perusal of them, he stated that some of the points
   "are untrue and others so distorted that they do not represent
   the facts"; yet it was on these points, unsifted and unproven,
   declared by him to be untrue and distorted, that he was
   condemned, and has since been attacked.


I have only just now seen anything at all of the documents except
   that first letter. There have been other supposed rebuttals and
   other documents which I had only seen to-day and while there are
   a number of points I should challenge as inaccurate, *yet all
   those are minor points and do not affect the great question.* It
   is simply that there are points of so-called rebuttal which are
   untrue and others so distorted that they do not represent the
   facts of the case *but these do not affect the central points.*

It will be seen that the important qualifying phrases italicised by
   us are omitted by. Mrs. Besant.

{The italicised phrases are here marked between asterisks *...*}

This was Mr. Leadbeater's statement at the beginning of the
   inquiry, before he was questioned and had to make some damaging
   further admissions.

Mrs. Besant's statement that it was on the points in the second
   batch of documents only that "he was condemned and has since
   been attacked" is not the fact.

The Committee unanimously advised Col. Olcott to accept Mr.
   Leadbeater's resignation, which was written only just before it
   met, because of his own confession in the first place, and
   because to their amazement he still persisted in defending his
   teaching, and made even further admissions.

At that time in the Society we were unanimous that it was wrong.
   Mr. Leadbeater's teaching had not yet been introduced into the
   "thought of the Theosophical world."

Denunciation of the Committee.

To weaken this unanimous advice Mrs. Besant now denounces some of
   the members of the Committee as unfit to advise Colonel Olcott,
   with whom the ultimate decision rested and whose impartiality
   Mr. Leadbeater freely acknowledged at the end of the inquiry.

In reply to the late President-Founder's question: "I should like
   to ask Mr. Leadbeater if he thinks I have acted impartially?" -
   Mr Leadbeater replied: "Absolutely." (See Minutes.)

Mrs. Besant, nevertheless, declares that "the so-called trial of
   Mr. Leadbeater was a travesty of justice" (p. 7), and so
   asperses the memory of the late President-Founder.

Mr. Leadbeater was not tried judicially; the nature of the
   Committee was twice laid down by Colonel Olcott as follows:

"(a) Of course you know the executive power is vested in me. You
   are here to advise me and to hear what Mr. Leadbeater has to
   say, and to act according to your judgment after hearing him."

"(b) We should not keep in anything, but have frank disclosure. You
   are not sitting judicially, but to advise me what to do."

Mr. Leadbeater was given every opportunity to explain his position
   and justify his conduct; unless, of course, questioning him on
   the evidence is to be considered unfair and a "travesty of

To show the baselessness of Mrs. Besant's denunciation, it may be
   stated that the apparently most telling point she tries to make
   - the shooting story - seems to have arisen from a rumour we
   heard at the time, that if the matter became public, and Mr.
   Leadbeater were to return to America, it was likely that a
   relative of one or the boys might "go for him with a shot-gun."
   (E. W.; G. R. S. M.). As to psychic influence, though this is
   quite news to the two of us who sat on the Committee, we may be
   permitted to remark that it is hardly consistent of Mrs. Besant
   to denounce belief in psychic testimony as a disqualification.

The unanimous opinion of the Committee was that such teaching
   should not be given under any circumstances whatever, not even
   to depraved boys, much less therefore to boys who had no
   knowledge of such practices. The only real difference of opinion
   among the members of the Committee was as to whether they should
   advise expulsion or acceptance of resignation only, as
   commensurate with the offence, after Mr. Leadbeater's further
   admissions. They finally took the more lenient course. The
   unanimous decision of the Committee was given in the following

"That having considered certain charges against Mr. Leadbeater, and
   having listened to his explanations, this Committee recommend
   the acceptance by the President-Founder of his resignation
   already offered in anticipation of the Committee's decision."

On p.8, Mrs. Besant now expressly withdraws the condemnation of Mr.
   Leadbeater's advice which she had put on record in her very
   important letter of June, 1906, on the ground that the
   "information" on which she had based it was "false." Its falsity
   is alleged on two points.

First Point of Alleged "Falsity."

(1) With regard to the first (the "fouling" of the mind), it is
   sufficient to quote Mrs. Besant's own words of condemnation, in
   parallel columns with Mr. Leadbeater's own admissions before the
   Advisory Committee.

{Again, the nature of this Internet version requires that the
   parallel columns mentioned be listed in sequence - A.B.}


Mr. THOMAS: Your reply as to scarcely recollecting suggests that
   there were so many cases. I should like to know whether in any
   case . . . there was definite action?  Mr. LEADBEATER: You mean
   touch? That might have taken place.  * * * Mr. MEAD: I want to
   ask whether this advice was given on appeal or not?  Mr.
   LEADBEATER: Sometimes without, sometimes with. I advised it at
   times as a prophylactic.


He [Mr. Leadbeater] denied none of the charges, but in answer to
   questions, very much strengthened them. for he alleged that he
   had actually handled the boys himself, and that he had thus
   dealt with boys before puberty "as a prophylactic." So that the
   advice which was supposed to be given to rescue a boy as a last
   resort, in the grip of sexual passion, became advice putting
   foul ideas into the minds of boys innocent of all sex-impulses.

Still further than this, Mrs. Besant condemned Mr. Leadbeater's
   teaching in all respects.

M. BERNARD: Since Mr. Leadbeater was teaching these boys to help
   them in case of need, considering that men may be in the same
   difficulty, has he taught this to any grown-up men? Has he
   taught the same thing in the same personal way to grown-up men
   as to children?  Mr. LEADBEATER: I believe that at least on two
   occasions in my life I have given that advice to young men as
   better than the one generally adopted.  Col. OLCOTT: Since you
   came into the Society?  Mr. LEADBEATER: I think not, but one
   case might have been. You are probably not aware that one at
   least of the great Church organisations for young men deals with
   the matter in the same manner[!]


Let me here place on record my opinion that such teaching as this
   given to men, let alone innocent boys, is worthy of the sternest
   reprobation. It distorts and perverts the sex-instinct,
   implanted in men for the preservation of the race; it degrades
   the ideas of marriage, fatherhood, and motherhood, humanity's
   most sacred ideals; it befouls the imagination, pollutes the
   emotions, and undermines the health.

It will thus be seen that Mrs. Besant's original condemnation was
   based not on "false information," hut on her own interpretation
   of Mr. Leadbeater's admissions.

That the reason for giving the "advice" was sometimes other than
   that professed, may he seen from the fact that, in his letter of
   confession, Mr. Leadbeater admitted that he had told one of the
   boys "that physical growth is frequently promoted by the setting
   in motion of these currents, but that they need regulation." The
   boy's evidence on this point ("the promise of the increase of
   physical manhood") formed the basis of one of the charges. The
   cipher letter further corroborates this evidence.

In the face of the opinion she placed "on record" in 1906, Mrs.
   Besant now denies (p.8) that there was any "fouling" of the
   "imagination" even of the "minds of boys innocent of all
   sex-impulses." Yet (on p.9) she admits it was taught not only to
   boys not yet addicted to the practice, but also to one or two
   "before what is called the age of puberty."

The plea of justification now urged for this extraordinary change
   of opinion is that "certain symptoms had already shown
   themselves either on the physical plane or in the aura."

The giving of this teaching then even to children Mrs.  Besant now
   refuses to condemn in Mr. Leadbeater's case; and thus opens the
   way for any psychic in the Society to justify the teaching of it
   on his bare assertion that he has seen this or that "symptom "
   in a child's aura.

All such excuses and subterfuges we emphatically reject, for the
   practice under any circumstance can never lessen lust but only
   enhance it.

Second Point of Alleged "Falsity."

(2) The second point on the "falsity" of which Mrs. Besant
   withdraws her condemnation is the question of frequency. Here
   Mr. Leadbeater's denial, quoted by Mrs. Besant (p. 9), and the
   testimony of the mother of boy No. 3 as to the "original
   interval" are in direct conflict.

In the letter to the boy, the genuineness of which Mr. Leadbeater
   acknowledges, he writes :

"There may be this much reason in what he [the Doctor] says, that
   while you are not quite well we should spend no force that can
   be avoided. You will remember that when we met in --- I
   suggested longer intervals until you were completely recovered."

It is to be noted that this "suggestion" was made because the boy
   was ill. The "original" interval to which the mother refers was
   advised prior to this meeting.

The most striking point in Mrs. Besant's plea is her appeal for
   "utter confidence" in Mr. Leadbeater's statements and denials;
   frequently she says with regard to evidence "it is not true that
. . . ," when this simply means "Mr. Leadbeater says
   it is not true." Mr. Leadbeater is always to be believed no
   matter what the testimony against him of the boys and mothers
   (or even of his own letters) may be, for Mrs. Besant has "utter
   confidence in his candour."

But one of the main points against Mr. Leadbeater is that he taught
   these practices without the knowledge of the parents and bound
   the boys to secrecy, as has been fully admitted by himself. Mrs.
   Besant writes, in her Simla letter of June 9, 1906:

"Nothing can excuse giving to young boys instructions on sexual
   matters to be kept from their parents, the rightful protectors
   of their children."

Why then, if Mr. Leadbeater is so candid with Mrs.  Besant, did he
   not breathe a word to her of his teaching before he was
   detected? For in the same letter Mrs. Besant writes:

"This was the first time I had heard of such a method of meeting
   the sexual difficulty let alone Mr. Leadbeater's recommendation
   of it. I had always regarded self-abuse as one of the lowest
   forms of vice, and a thing universally reprobated by decent
   people. To me it was not arguable."

Now we are not labouring this point as to precisely "daily"
   practice, but Mrs. Besant knows, as we know, that the cipher
   letter says, "twice a week is permissible," preceded and
   followed by words that make it impossible to put a curative
   construction upon the "advice." How then does Mrs. Besant deal
   with this most important document, which, unfortunately, came
   into the hands of the American Executive only a day before the
   meeting of the Advisory Committee in London, too late to be
   included in the evidence? No contemptuous words can brush aside
   this document.

The Cipher Letter.

The "fragment of paper" is sufficient to accommodate not a note
   only but a letter of 229 words, beginning with "My own darling
   boy," and ending with " Thousand kisses darling" (in cipher). It
   is true that the first half of this letter refers to a psychic
   experience, but the second, of equal length, begins with the
   words "Turning to other matters," and these matters are sexual;
   it is in the latter part that the Cipher sentences occur, and it
   is in the body of the cipher, towards the end, that the sentence
   referred to by Mrs. Besant ("glad sensation is so pleasant") is

If, as Mrs. Besant says (p. 11), the boy replied to the letter
   (though his reply was not sent), the letter can hardly be a
   forgery to "go with the Coulomb and Pigott letters." If the boy
   himself did not understand the sentence in the sense implied, as
   Mrs. Besant says - the mother (in a covering letter addressed to
   one of the members of the Investigating Committee in America)
   says she so understands it, and makes it an additional ground of
   complaint. As the letter stands it is impossible to read the
   sentence otherwise than as applying to its immediate context.
   It could not apply to the psychic experience, for that was not
   of a pleasant nature.

Mrs. Besant, however, says that Mr. Leadbeater states he does not
   "recognise it [the letter] in its present form." Who then has
   changed the "form" of the letter - the boy or the mother?  And
   if so, what possible purpose could be served thereby?  Will Mr.
   Leadbeater himself venture to assert that the letter or any part
   of it is a forgery?

But even if the sentence in question were entirely eliminated,
   there is that in the rest of the letter which calls for the most
   searching inquiry, and its genuineness is further corroborated
   by the identity of its very peculiar phrasing with that of the
   other letter in evidence which Mr. Leadbeater has acknowledged
   as his.

It is, therefore, impossible to join Mrs. Besant in letting it "go
   with the Coulomb and Pigott letters."

As to this document we agree with Miss Ward in her recent circular

"If it is genuine it settles for us [me] the whole question of Mr.
   Leadbeater's attitude: if it is not genuine it is a piece of
   inconceivable wickedness, which leaves Mr. Leadbeater grossly
   wronged and of which the perpetrator should, by every code of
   honour and justice, be unveiled and punished."

It is remarkable that Dr. van Hook himself has nowhere published
   this "repudiation," but from a copy of a letter written by him
   to Mr. Whyte, which Mrs. Besant has had printed in "Theosophy in
   India" (Sept., 1908], we find that Dr. van Hook expressly states
   that "in the Letters published over his [my] signature" the
   "general problem" has not been dealt with, but only the
   "specific question" of Mr. Leadbeater's "solution" of it.

We may here point out that it is not the fact that the Convention
   had before it only a "garbled account," as Mrs. Besant says (p.
   13), of Dr. van Hook's utterances; every sentence that could he
   used to persuade the Convention that Dr. van Hook did not mean
   what he wrote, was insisted on by Dr. van Hook's and Mr.
   Leadbeater's supporters; his paragraphs were read repeatedly in
   full, and the sentences Mrs. Besant quotes (p. 12) were
   especially insisted on.

In his Open Letter (Addendum, May 5) Dr. van Hook speaks of nothing
   else but Mr. Leadbeater's teaching and method and "solution" of
   the problem. And if the following paragraphs in it do not refer
   to Mr. Leadbeater's "solution," to his "system," to the blessing
   he is conferring by it, then to what on earth do they refer?
   Dr. van Hook's "repudiation" of his own plain meaning simply
   makes nonsense of his whole contention. Dr. van Hook (or, if he
   prefers it, his "Master") writes:

"Hence the "crime" or "wrong" of teaching the boys the practice
   alluded to was no crime or wrong at all, but only the advice of
   a wise teacher who foresaw an almost limitless period of
   suffering for his charge if the solution for his difficulties
   usually offered by the World were adopted and relief obtained by
   an associated instead of by an individual and personal act.

"The introduction of this question into the thought of the
   Theosophical World is but the precursor of its introduction into
   the thought of the outer World. Mr Leadbeater has been the one
   to bear the persecution and martyrdom of its introduction. The
   solution of the question can only be reached by those who study
   it from the Theosophic standpoint, admitting the validity of our
   teachings in regard to thoughts and their relations to acts.
   Hence the service of Theosophy to the world in this respect will
   be of the most far-reaching consequence, extending into the
   remote future of the progress of Man.

"No mistake was made by Mr. Leadbeater in the nature of the advice
   he gave his boys. No mistake was made in the way he gave it. Nor
   did he make any mistake in the just estimation of the
   consequences of any other solution of the terrible problem which
   was presented to him.

"If any mistake was made it was a mistake of judgment in trusting
   too much to the confidence of the parents of the boys who, he
   thought, knew and loved him so well that they would accept his
   judgment on matters about which ordinary people have little or
   no knowledge and about which he, by the nature of his occult
   training, had a full comprehension.

"Betrayal of confidence on the part of some parents of the boys
   resulted in the scandal which brought this problem to the
   attention of Theosophists as a preliminary to its introduction
   to the world. Woe to those who violated their vows in making
   disclosures in this case. All honor to those parents who,
   braving the opinion of the World, have boldly set themselves
   against the current of the World's prejudice and have avowed
   themselves and their sons under undying obligation to the great
   teacher who aided their sons in overcoming difficulties which
   without his aid would not only have been insuperable in this
   life but would have led them into almost inconceivable
   complications in future lives."

If this does not mean the introduction into the thought of the
   Theosophical Society, and thus into the thought of the outer
   world, of Mr.Leadbeater's "solution" of the problem, what can it
   possibly mean?  Mr. Leadbeater's "martyrdom" is not because of
   his introducing the general sex problem with regard to young
   people; that has been introduced into the thought of the world
   for many many centuries. It is because of his "solution" of it
   that Dr. van Hook calls on us to exalt Mr. Leadbeater to the
   highest pinnacle of honour, for he gives "all honour" to the
   parents who entrust their children to Mr. Leadbeater to receive
   such teaching, and who avow their undying obligation for this
   high favour!

Against the introduction of this "solution" of the sex problem into
   the "thought of the Theosophical world" and against Dr. van
   Hook's glorification of it, we protest with all our energy; we
   characterise the teaching of it in any case as a "corrupting
   practice" and "wholly evil," no matter who gives it, not
   excepting occultists and psychics; and we call for the public
   repudiation of it by the man who has confessed to teaching it
   practically, before he is invited to return in triumph as a
   "wise teacher" to the Theosophical Society.

The Main Issue Evaded.

As to the main issue, then, Mrs. Besant evades it when she says (p.

"The Theosophical Society, as a whole, cannot be committed to any
   special solution of this [the sex] problem, and its members must
   be left free."

This we have not asked; what we do ask our fellow-members to do, is
   to condemn one special and corrupting practice as a solution of
   the problem. Advice to break off gradually this corrupting habit
   when once it had been contracted, is not the ground of our
   protest. It is the teaching of this thing to men who have never
   practised it, and to boys and children who have never heard of
   it even, against which we protest.

The Real Cause of the Present Dissension.

Mrs. Besant says (p. 15) that Mr. Leadbeater:

"resigned two and a half years ago in the vain attempt to save the
   Society from this dissension."

As to a magnanimous resignation there was little choice; the
   wording of the unanimous resolution of the Committee shows that
   clearly enough.

There was, however, only one way in which Mr. Leadbeater could save
   the Society from dissension, as he himself said before the
   Advisory Committee:

"Since this has come forward it would be undesirable that I should
   *appear before the public."* [Italics ours.]

The trouble has not been made by those who accepted Mr.
   Leadbeater's resignation as the natural sequence of his conduct,
   but by those who have persistently forced him into ever greater
   and greater prominence; and although he has once stated that he
   does not seek re-entry, he has lent himself in every way to
   being pushed forward publicly, and has thus aided most
   powerfully in keeping this scandal and this dissension alive in
   the Theosophical Society with ever greater and greater
   intensification. The Letter of the President in answer to our
   earnest appeal will only bring more dissension, and help the
   more to ventilate the unsavoury subject of Mr. Leadbeater's
   "solution" and methods in the Theosophical Society. Under such
   circumstances how can people be invited to join our ranks? It is
   manifestly unfair to allow outsiders to involve themselves in
   such a scandalous state of affairs without warning, and that
   means stating the facts. Just the very people whom we desire to
   welcome will be kept out, and that, too, even with Mrs. Besant's
   Letter alone before them, much more when they come to know the
   whole matter. What folly is this to sacrifice the welfare of the
   Society in the vain attempt to re-establish the public
   reputation of an individual who has lost it on his own
   confession and by his persistent refusal to repudiate his
   pernicious teaching and practice!

Combined Action Necessary.

Already many have left because of the policy pursued by Mr.
   Leadbeater's supporters. In America hundreds, it is said as many
   as a thousand, have gone out in the last two and a half years;
   and here, among a number of other good members, we have lost two
   old General Secretaries and one former Acting General Secretary.
   Why, we ask, should old and valued members, or even the latest
   recruit, be driven out of the Society for the sake of one man,
   who has taught self-abuse to men, boys, and children, and
   refuses to repudiate his corrupting system?

Combined action being now forced upon us, we earnestly appeal to
   our fellow members not to resign individually, but to join us in
   our present protest, and register their names with us; so that
   if still further action is forced upon us we may take it
   together as a united body. We appeal not only to the members of
   our own Section, but also to all members of the Society who
   sympathise with our protest, to give us their support by also
   registering their names.

We would further ask our sympathisers to let our protest he known
   as widely as possible in the Society. For while the President
   has at her disposal not only the official organisation of the
   whole Society but also the good services of a widespread inner
   order, we are dependent on unorganised effort.

True Loyalty.

Finally, Mrs. Besant calls on us to be "loyal" to the Masters, and
   "to Their choice," and "to work for Them." Is it, we ask,
   loyalty to Masters to tolerate and to refuse to condemn the
   teaching of self-abuse?

We say that it is because of our loyalty to all the Masters of
   Morality who have taught the world throughout the ages that we
   protest, and that in so doing we work for Theosophy, and should
   fail in our plain duty were we not to protest. It is the best
   loyalty, therefore, to the Theosophical Society, and also to its
   elected President, no matter how "chosen," to protest, and
   resist the introduction of this teaching into the thought of the
   Theosophical world, and therewith also the reinstatement of Mr.
   Leadbeater in the Society without his full public repudiation of
   this teaching.

We cannot do better than conclude with the following words, quoted
   from the leaflet entitled Occultism and Truth, issued in 1894,
   at the time of the Judge crisis, and signed by H.S.Olcott, A.P.
   Sinnett, Annie Besant, Bertram Keightley, W. Wynn Westcott, E.T.
   Sturdy, and C. W Leadbeater:

"A spurious Occultism dallies with truth and falsehood, and argues
   that deception on the illusory physical plane is consistent with
   purity on the loftier planes on which the Occultist has his true
   life; it speaks contemptuously of "mere worldly morality" - a
   contempt that might be justified if it raised a higher standard,
   but which is out of place when the phrase is used to condone
   acts which the "mere worldly morality" would disdain to
   practise. The doctrine that the end justifies the means has
   proved in the past fruitful of all evil; no means that are
   impure can bring about an end that is good; else were the Good
   Law a dream and Karma mere delusion. From these errors flows an
   influence mischievous to the whole Theosophical Society,
   undermining the stern and rigid morality necessary as a
   foundation for Occultism of the Right Hand Path."

G. R. S. MEAD.

16, Selwood Place,
Onslow Gardens,
London, S.W., Nov., 1908.

[Copies of all the documents may be seen by Members of the
   Theosophical Society on application to Mr. Mead or Miss Ward.]


Scanned an uploaded by Alan Bain, June, 1996
Ancient Wisdom for a New Age

[Back to Top]

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