Theos-Talk Archives (November 1996 Message tl00069)

Mark wrote:

>It seems to me that through their deceptive actions the founders cast
>suspicion and doubt on much of what they were trying to do (and that's
>the optimistic view).

I agree.

>Were such hoaxes necessary if these things were true and how can
>you possibly justify or excuse them. If similar things happened in an
>organization today what would your response be? We can't just excuse
>them for being "Leos". That's too easy. Aren't they accountable for
>their actions?

An excellent soul-searching question, in my opinion.  Yes, they are
accountable. One of the things that circles my mind quite often is how HPB
taught that THE GOAL was to be PURE COMPASSION, yet, she seemed to take
delight in ridiculing those who disagreed with her views; she used the word
"fool" when referring to others so often, it's embarrassing - and hardly
compassionate. I know she knew better and she could have at least kept those
patronizing thoughts out of her "official" writings.

The Leadbeater thing is even more difficult.  I didn't know he was a
suspected child molester until subscribing to this list.  That has caused me
serious inner conflict.  I know intellectually anyone can be the
"transmitter" of Truth; but emotionally, I wonder why "those who would
transmit" would choose such a shaky relay station.  Makes me even doubt the
wisdom of the "Masters."

I wonder about people who belong to a "group" who's prominent "guides" are
of suspect clarity.  In turn, I wonder about the mental clarity of the
members of the group.

>Has anybody read a book called "Madame Blavatsky's Baboon"
>(By Peter Washington. =A91993,1995 Schocken Books Inc., New York). It's
>well-researched and seems unafraid to look at the history of the
>Society, warts and all.

I have the book, but, at this point, feel it would be an act of raw courage
to read it. I don't know how much more I can take.

>I know it's risky to ask questions like this on a list of Theosophy
>proponents, advocates, members, etc. (I throw myself in there
>somewhere). But doesn't it bother anyone else that this stuff happened?

It doesn't seem to bother many on this list.  It bothers me alot.  Maybe I'm
just one of those Monads - commonly referred to as a "laggard" - who just
hasn't quite figured it out.  I don't see how it can't make people extremely
uncomfortable that our sources of information make such great targets.
Perhaps it's hardest for those like me, who seem unable to consciously
transcend the physical to receive "confirmations" from the spiritual realm,
to establish a sound foundation.

Having said all that, I don't believe that quiet acceptance and a "that's
life" philosophy, offered by some on the list, is all that admirable either.

Maybe it will be impossible for me to be a theosophist, or belong to a
Society, or read the theosophical philosophy without being at the same time
both enthralled and embarrassed.

Kym