THEOSOPHY, Vol. 23, No. 11, September, 1935
(Pages 481-493; Size: 35K)
(Number 9 of a 10-part series)
IXOur "views" have to stand or fall upon their own merit, since we claim neither divine revelation nor infallibility.OF all genuine or purported phenomena that can be considered by the human reason, what so far-reaching in its implications as the Appearance in human form of a Mahatma, a Master of Wisdom, a Messenger from Their great Lodge?
Determined to follow but one voice -- that of our conscience and reason -- we will go on analyzing and laughing at everything that claims to be divine truth notwithstanding that it is stamped, for all but the incurably blind, with every sign of falsification. Those tinselled rags of human workmanship all called "divine inspiration", all mutually conflicting.
We take nothing on faith, and would feel extremely mortified were any of our Theosophists to accept the smallest phenomenon on second-hand evidence.
The world teems with prophets, and since we neither tolerate nor believe in them, we reject both the old as the modern Balaam, and would as soon believe his ass talking Latin to us.
Has any one of these "prophets" ever benefited mankind? No! On the contrary, each of them has dug for those who believed on him one more deep chasm, until humanity is now absolutely honey-combed with such chasms. Who will fill up those accursed pits?
--H.P.B.: The Theosophist, May, 1883.
Of all ideas or ideals presented to the human conscience, what so supernal as that of perfected Man, a Buddha, a Christ, "returned back from the other shore" to labor for the salvation of humanity?
Of all travesties or blasphemies, alike upon the Ideal and the Real, what so degrading and so ruinous in their effects upon the reason and conscience of the race and of the individual as the false prophet and the successor?
In his Notes on the Bhagavad-Gita, William Q. Judge took occasion to quote from Walt Whitman's apostrophe "To Him That Was Crucified". H.P.B. and her Masters have put on record their recognition of the nature and mission of Jesus, as of other Avatars and Adepts; and, also, their "horror and contempt" of the false prophets and falsifications. Shall any true Theosophist of to-day, any more than H.P.B. herself, either "tolerate or believe in" the false prophets with whom the Movement teems, the "tinselled rags of human workmanship called 'divine inspiration'" by the "Successors"?
"The disputes and assertions, the bawling and din, the divisions, jealousies, recriminations on every side," of which Walt Whitman wrote, and which have hung like a pall over Christendom for nearly twenty centuries -- these same mental and moral dust-storms have eroded the Theosophical soil, have blinded and choked the whole area and atmosphere of the Theosophical Movement. The various Leaders and Successors have digged, each his chasm for their believing followers. Who, then, if not the true Theosophists within and without all the societies, will fill up those accursed pits?
In preceding chapters of this series we have set out, on the one side, what the chief Balaams and their asses have had to say; on the other, we have off-set these tinselled rags with definite, inclusive, applicable citations from H. P. Blavatsky and William Q. Judge, put on record many years in advance, so that all who would use their reason, listen to their conscience, might take nothing on faith. What have Theosophists learned from the teachings and phenomena of the Movement, if they are unable to discriminate between the true and the false? What do they know of the "Secret Path" followed by the Nirmanakayas, if they can so easily be misled by mediums, psychics, and successors clothed in theosophical raiment? What glimpse have they of the "Heart Doctrine" who will not defend it against the prostitutor and the panderer? If the followers of the false prophets have need to use their reason to discern the wheat from the tares, have not those who do so discern equal need to ask of their conscience whether they have been faithful or unfaithful stewards? The sin of omission in the good makes possible the sin of commission by the evil.
The quotations given in the last chapter were sufficient to present to the reader Dr. de Purucker in the light of his own utterances. They should be ample to make clear that those who took him at his word took him on faith -- not on any knowledge of their own, not on any concordance of his claims with the teachings of H. P. Blavatsky and William Q. Judge. Yet of all the psychological phenomena of the Movement what more stupendous than those claims?
Dr. de Purucker's conception of the nature of the Mahatmas whose "intermediary" he claims to be, his capacity as an esoteric Teacher "in Their Names", his qualifications for Apostolic Succession and Spiritual Authority as one of the Guruparampara Chain -- are all painfully and glaringly apparent in a single sentence of his first Letter. After affirming that They had visited him, he proceeds to say of "M." and "K.H.", the two holiest Names in Theosophical history:"Each of these two has progressed far along the Path of Initiation since H.P.B.'s days, themselves advancing to heights still more noble than those where they were when they became known to the Society through H.P.B."Is this the conception and the language of an Adept, of a Chela, or even of the humblest student with a spark of intuition in him? How very far along the same Path must Dr. de Purucker have progressed to be able to speak with Authority "in Their Names" of the Mahatmas? According to Theosophical teachings a Mahatma is one who has reached Samma Sambuddhi, "perfect enlightenment." It should be evident that for anyone to speak of Them in such terms as quoted is sheer presumption -- a sample of the self-glorification inherent in "Successorship" by whomsoever claimed.
"For to him that is joined to all the living there is hope: for a living dog is better than a dead lion." So, Ecclesiastes. "The old lion of the Punjab", being dead, ceased to be alive to those "joined to the living": if they were to have "hope", a "living successor" was required. But to those to whom "She being dead yet speaketh", H.P.B. remains, out of the body as in the body, the real Head of the Movement. It is, or it should be, self-evident that any claim of "successorship" to H.P.B. only serves to draw attention away from her, the Teacher. Of what use the crucified life lived by H.P.B. for seventeen long years, of what use the recorded Teachings written with her heart's blood, if, when the funeral pyre died down, the Light of her mission and her message died out among her students? And what shall one think of her Masters, who sent her into the world, and who thus left the School and the Society founded by her, not to speak of mankind-at-large, at the mercy of claimants of every kind, with no sure guide or landmark? The conscience of each must make answer, as the reason of each must serve, in examining the words and works whether of Masters or men, of true or false prophets, and in comparing the one with the other.
Dr. de Purucker and his society and esoteric school have now been before the theosophical world long enough to be entering upon their seventh year. Under the law of cycles this is a fate-filled year for them, and through them for all their fellows in other societies and in none. Retrospect is in order, and will be profitable to all who undertake it seriously and, through them, to the Movement at large. The period ahead till the coming of the next Messenger is now two decades shorter than the period already elapsed since 1875. The lessons of the shadows have to be learned as well as those of the light. By conscience and by reason regarded and adjudged, much may yet be done to learn those retarded lessons, and so, to restore the Movement to its original aims and objects. Theosophists who have tolerated, if they have not believed in, the reign of the false prophets, must, if they would not be "sluggards", as H.P.B. called them, make haste to repair the mischiefs already done -- in part at least, owing to their supineness.
The Point Loma situation, as left by Madam Tingley, and to which Dr. de Purucker fell heir by his claimed "successorship", was precarious in the extreme. "Desperate cases require desperate remedies", and most if not all of the steps taken by Dr. de Purucker have to be studied with this in mind, if one is to understand them intelligently and "give the benefit of the doubt" to much that makes even common good faith highly questionable in many of his published utterances.
Despite the great sums of money which Madam Tingley was certainly an "adept" at extracting, her extravagances during her long career, the law-suits with which she was encumbered, the ever-dwindling membership, the weakening consequences of age and mismanagement -- all had made it unavoidable to mortgage the then valuable Point Loma properties. The vast depression which set in at practically the same time as her death occurred, the paralysis of initiative so long enforced upon the members -- all made Dr. de Purucker's throne an unstable and unenviable one, the continuity of the "Colony" more than dubious.
We have seen how he met the circumstances -- by claiming the highest and holiest auspices, by clothing himself with the aura of "divine inspiration", by the emission of prophetic promises less backed by the bullion of sober fact than the wild issues of German "reichmarks" in emergency. In his first Letter, therefore, reversing the policy of Madam Tingley, he urged each member to "take it upon himself or herself as a duty to bring in at least one new member a year." True, however, to the methods of our "blessed K.T.", he raises the question of the great need of money for the "work", and intimates that the membership dues are to be raised. All this, of course, "in the Masters' names", and with the avowal that he is pursuing the "secret" policies of "K.T." He explains this by saying:"I think that one of the most beautiful traits of our blessed K.T.'s character was her ability to change when change became advisable."In his third Letter, the dues are announced as $12.00 annually; in the fourth, intimation is given of a "plan" to place "the Headquarters-work on an easier and more productive financial foundation". Next, an unsuccessful attempt was made to float $400,000 of Trust Certificates among the "faithful." Later, all dues were abolished; at last, resort was had to a scheme of theosophical "Peter's pence" contributions in order to secure funds. The history of the Point Loma activities since 1896 shows device after device to "get the money". Dr. de Purucker has been greatly handicapped in this direction, as the results achieved indicate that he is by no means Madam Tingley's "successor" in money-raising ability.
Every Theosophist is aware of the fierce rivalry in earlier years between the Adyar and the Point Loma societies in the persons of the respective "Successors". What Mrs. Besant lacked in cunning she made up in intellect and daring. What Madam Tingley lacked in intellect and courage she made up in knowledge of human nature. Mrs. Besant disdained attention, beyond contempt, to the ceaseless flow of slander and innuendo from Point Loma -- flow as ceaseless toward those who left the society as toward the rival Besant organization. Thus, during long years, the Adyar society grew while the Point Loma society silted up until it became less than the "stagnant pond" of The Voice of the Silence.
Nothing is "more worth analyzing, nothing more entitled to be laughed at", than the recent Point Loma efforts toward "fraternization" among the rival theosophical societies and their rival "Successors". It is evident that before Madam Tingley's death the disparity between the Point Loma situation and that of the Adyar organization was weighed by her and her "Cabinet". During the years immediately preceding Madam Tingley's demise, some effort was made to offset the "arhatships", the revelations with which the Besant society was being profitably blessed, the neo-theosophical texts of Mrs. Besant and Mr. Leadbeater. Madam Tingley was too acute to attempt to rival "Man, Whence, How, and Whither", and similar productions, too old and failing to attempt to regain lost ground by fresh proselyting campaigns. But to hold her own diminishing returns, it was imperative to provide something for her remaining followers. A series of lectures, running through several years, was prepared and delivered to her "Esoteric Section," by Dr. de Purucker. To this we shall return.
When Madam Tingley died, it was clear that Mrs. Besant, too, could not long survive, nor could Mr. Leadbeater. It required no "clairvoyant powers" to perceive that no one in the Besant society could "hold a candle" to these two prophets. Why not, then, "change when change was advisable"? Why might not a fresh and strong campaign be opened from Point Loma, first with its own membership exoteric and "esoteric", and then at large for recruits; finally, why not "steal a leaf" out of Mrs. Besant's book following that "Successor's" elevation in 1907, and "hold out the olive branch" to former foes? Astutely planned, cleverly carried out, such a procedure might enable the Point Loma society to reap enormous advantages, might enable it to gather under its labarum, as Constantine and Eusebius, the most heterogeneous and conflicting elements. Could not a reincarnated theosophical Byzantine empire, physical and spiritual, exoteric and "esoteric", be formed out of the very hazards of the situation? Nothing more could be lost by such an attempt; everything might be gained. Out of the rival sects of the early centuries had been formed the two great Christian Churches: why not try the same mingling of the polemical and the irenical again?
Promising to the "esoteric section" new and wonderful revelations; promising to the society at large, a return of the departed glory of this Ichabod, Dr. de Purucker induced an equally promising reaction. A campaign for membership set in with all the zeal and persistence of a Methodist "revival" or the pre-election activities of a political party. "Lodges" sprang up "like magic" indeed -- almost as many "Lodges" as members! -- their activities a faithful reflex of the "inspiration" from Point Loma. In this respect these "Lodges" and these activities are neither better nor worse than the manifestations of the Adyar society -- for the two are identical. The rarest phenomenon in both is to find either a Lodge or an individual engaged in acquiring a Theosophical education for himself, or in assisting others to the like education. Nor is this other than obtains with all the churches and religious organizations in all history. It is the common failing of mankind, not merely of Theosophists. It is merely "politics" carried, under other designations, into what is assumed to be transcendental fields.
Dr. de Purucker's fifth Letter is dated February 17, 1930, and discloses that he has appraised the results so far accruing within the fold, and adjudges them ample to warrant the next step. We quote:"Following instructions that have been given to me in very definite form, it is my duty to tell you that the time has now come when every true and devoted Theosophist should work toward a unification of the various, more or less scattered, and, in some cases, alas, antagonistic Societies of the general Theosophical Movement. Our own Constitution is so broad in its foundations and in spirit is so esoteric, ... that I do believe that it is a model instrument under which every devoted believer in Theosophical teachings can work, no matter to what Theosophical Society he may belong.How "identic" this new policy is with that of "my great-hearted Predecessor Katherine Tingley" may, alas, be seen in quite other light by referring to that "great-hearted Predecessor" herself. One has but to turn to the Third Point Loma edition of the Key to Theosophy to read (Footnote 60, page 251) the following:
"Comradeship, brotherhood, unity, union, combined efforts, and the sense of Theosophic solidarity, belong to the distinctive spirit of the new Theosophical Era into which we of the T.S. are now entering....
"Addressing myself, therefore, specifically and directly to my own beloved F.T.S., I will tell you the following: Any member of any other Theosophical Society can become a Fellow of the T.S. under our Constitution and under my leadership, without of necessity feeling that he or she must resign from the other Theosophical Society in which he first saw the gleams of Theosophical Light....
"Our Constitution is broad enough, I believe, to satisfy anyone. Our ideals are they of the original Theosophical Society of our beloved H.P.B.; our methods, as far as we can put them into operation at the present time, are identic with those of our beloved H.P.B.; and as regards policy, my policy and that of my great-hearted Predecessor Katherine Tingley, are identic, without a hair's breadth of variation from that followed by H.P.B., under the command of her great Teachers.""It is a regrettable fact that many people use the name of Theosophy and our Organization for self-interest, as also that of H. P. Blavatsky, the Foundress, to attract attention to themselves and to gain public support. ... thus misleading the public, and many honest inquirers are hence led away from the truths of Theosophy as presented by H. P. Blavatsky and her successors, W. Q. Judge and Katherine Tingley, and practically exemplified in their Theosophical work for the uplifting of humanity.Dr. de Purucker is, however, quite "identic" with Madam Tingley in making his own bid for "recognition":
"It should be distinctly understood that the UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD AND THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY recognizes no other society or body using the name of Theosophy; and that its members are in no wise affiliated with any other society or body calling itself Theosophical and not recognizing Katherine Tingley as the Leader and Official Head of the international Theosophical Movement.""There are Theosophists belonging to different societies in the world today who are heart-hungry for Theosophic truth, and for Theosophic guidance. They crave, they long for, a Theosophical Leader and Teacher whom they can trust;...One has but to compare Dr. de Purucker's conjurations with those cited in earlier chapters of this series from Mrs. Besant and Krishnamurti at the period of the Adyar "Jubilee" to note the "identic" nature of these appeals -- to see that they are all alike a bid for followers of a "Leader" and "Successor", not for students and disciples of the Messenger and the Message of Theosophy. Indeed, Dr. de Purucker pays his respects to all such, and to H.P.B. and Judge, in the same Letter:
"...the stream of Inspiration and Holy Light flows even now with undiminished intensity ... Those who have ears to hear, let them hear....
"Oh my beloved Theosophists! Take heed and listen well! You can drink at these Pierian [Purucker] Springs still, if such is your wish.""I believe that there are certain kinds of Theosophists who dislike the idea of a Leader and Teacher, and who think that H.P.B. was the only Teacher, or perhaps that H.P.B. and W. Q. Judge were the only Teachers: nevertheless, in the quiet of the night-time, ... they must realize that the flow of Inspiration from the great Mahatmas ... has never been broken, and cannot be broken if the Theosophical teachings are true."Paraphrasing Dr. de Purucker's language, if not his "inspiration": Perhaps there are Theosophists who do realize all day long as well as in the quiet of the night-time that the Link has never been broken with the Mahatmas, and cannot be broken -- if Theosophists are true. Where else is that Link, what else is that Link, but the Inspiration to be found in the study and application of true Theosophy?
Dr. de Purucker makes light indeed of those whose Names he so freely uses to lard his own pretensions:"It is futile, it is even childish, to point to an occasional statement here and there, made by H.P.B. or by Judge, to the effect that no Master of Wisdom will be sent to the western world until the last quarter of the Twentieth Century -- if even then."If it is "childish" to call attention to these "occasional statements here and there", how much more "childish" were H.P.B. and Judge in making those statements. Dr. de Purucker appears to have no faintest conception that these "occasional statements" are integral with all other statements of the true Teachers; that Theosophy is a coherent philosophy, not a collect to be recited, nor a collection of ideas which each may vary, amend, reject or accept at his own sweet will and pleasure. What conception can Dr. de Purucker have of the Law of Cycles as applied to the periodic, orderly re-appearances of the Great Teachers and the Great Teaching? On no single subject have the Masters, H.P.B. and Judge laid such stress as this which Dr. de Purucker, like Mrs. Besant and other rival "Successors", dismiss as "childish" -- or alters to suit his own occasion.
In his seventh Letter, dated July 11, 1930, Dr. de Purucker writes at long length for the encouragement of the faithful in the various activities inaugurated, but comes back to what lies closest to his own heart:"The fundamental cause of the trouble and distress in the other Theosophical Societies ... is that none, outside of our own, recognizes and follows a responsible Teacher and Leader....Manifestly the "one common Head as Leader and Teacher" whom he desires to be recognized is himself. To the extent that this is done all other considerations are minor, all other conditions waived or waivable. Thus the very root and origin of the first split in the Parent society and the "Esoteric Section" inaugurated by H.P.B., is by Dr. de Purucker made the sine qua non condition precedent to "fraternization" and "reunion" among Theosophists and Theosophical societies. The claim of "Successor" made by Mrs. Besant opened the war of factions: the claim of "Successor" made by Dr. de Purucker is to heal the breach! Could logical and moral absurdity go further than this?
"The great need of the Theosophical Movement, as contrasted with any Theosophical Society, is a living pulsating Heart, and an esoterically trained Mind, such Heart and Mind united in a Teacher and Leader whom all can trust.... The lack of such a spiritual Head accounts for the actual existence of these various Theosophical Societies,...
"Were all the Theosophical Societies to recognise one common Head as Leader and Teacher, my conviction is that all these troubles and intestinal (sic) difficulties and squabbles and the internecine war that is so frequently waged among them, would vanish as mists before the Sun....
"Of course this is but one way of expressing the fact ... of an esoteric succession of authorised and capable Teachers and Leaders,..."
In pursuance of this "inspiration" a representative of Point Loma attended a "world-conference" of the Adyar society in Switzerland to invite participation in a "World-Convention of Theosophists" to meet at Point Loma in August, 1931, to celebrate the hundredth anniversary of the birth of H.P.B. Of all the advertising devices invented at Point Loma this was, for the time, the most successful -- rivaling in interest Madam Tingley's first "Crusade" in 1896. Dr. Besant and her satellites responded eagerly to the Point Loma advances -- Mrs. Besant stating that she would attend with "My Brother, Bishop Charles W. Leadbeater." So "promising" was the outlook that, in his eighth Letter, dated September 21, 1930, Dr. de Purucker takes occasion to say:"The Pan-Theosophical gathering at our Headquarters at Point Loma, to take place on the 11th and perhaps the 12th of August, 1931, in honor of the Centenary of our beloved H.P.B., which months ago I spoke of and which already has received such wide publicity, will, I hope with all my heart, be the most important single event in the history of the Theosophical Movement since the passing of our beloved W. Q. Judge."Like the "Crusades" of Madam Tingley, the "tinselled rags" of these glowing anticipations quickly turned from tawdry to drab. At first, the gaudy glitter of Point Loma "brotherhood" attracted the attention and interest of many sincere Theosophists as well as the specious response of Mrs. Besant.
In The Theosophical Forum for April 15, 1930, continuing his discussion of a "made-up" question, Mr. J. H. Fussell writes at length on the subject of "Successorship" as claimed by Dr. de Purucker, and the "difference between 'your' [the Point Loma] Theosophical Society ... the Adyar Society and 'The United Lodge of Theosophists'", the question asked being, "are they not all really the same?"
Mr. Fussell first makes the remarkable statement that "the T.S. [meaning the Point Loma T.S.] has continued unbroken from the date of its foundation in 1875 until the present time; and that the E.S. has likewise continued uninterruptedly, without break, from the date of its foundation in 1888 until now." For historical accuracy this equals Mr. Jinarajadasa's Golden Book of the T.S.; for naiveté it surpasses Mr. Fussell's own account of the meeting of H.P.B., the "Gypsy", with Katherine Westcott (Madam Tingley), the "babe", "on the banks of the Merrimac". It disturbs him not at all that Mrs. Besant made identically the same claims for the Adyar society and its "E.S."; that the Hargrove society perseveringly asseverates the same great "facts"; that the sand-dune society at Halcyon likewise makes the "identic" assertions. It does not occur to him, to his flock, any more than it does within the folds of the three other one and only "T.S." and "E.S.", that if either of them is the reality, the others are necessarily wholly false, and so, no "fraternization" possible; that if all are alike spurious, then their fraternization could only be as spurious as their claims.
Mr. Fussell says that this "continuity" is because the Point Loma society "has ever had a responsible head and a living heart" -- meaning "our blessed K.T. and G. de P."; so he goes on:"Many Theosophists, not connected with our T.S., are today applauding the methods and policy of our Leader, and recognise that the Society is very much alive and must be reckoned with. Do they know what more than anything else has made possible the carrying out of our Leader's plans and the adoption of his present methods and policy -- in truth the policy of the Society has not changed from 1875 to the present day, although the methods of carrying out that policy have been wisely and necessarily changed to suit changing outer conditions -- do they know that the carrying out of these present methods and plans was prepared for and made possible by Katherine Tingley ...Thus, it is not the recorded Philosophy of H.P.B., the Theosophical Education prescribed by Judge, the "self-induced and self-devised efforts" of the theosophical students and inquirers to understand and apply the great Message in the light of their own conscience and reason that is the logic of the Theosophical teachings and the Theosophical Movement -- but the "logic" of Successorship! One might with as much propriety and respect for terms speak of the "logic" of miracles! One has but to compare the clear quotations made from H.P.B. during this series with the pronouncements of Mr. Fussell and Dr. de Purucker to grasp the ever-widening gulf between the opposite directions pointed out.
"Think a moment: look at the logic of it. Here is the T.S. today, a living body under the guidance and direction of a living Teacher, continuing and expanding the work of his great Predecessor, H.P.B. Whence comes the life of the T.S. today? ...
"H.P.B. years ago said that her work would be vindicated in the twentieth century. It is already vindicated, and increasingly so, by the work and methods of work of her Successor, the present leader of the T.S. ... and the logic of it is: Successorship!"
Mr. Fussell concludes his scripture with an appeal in especial:"So members of the United Lodge of Theosophists, as to all other Theosophists not yet affiliated with us, we extend the hand of brotherhood and invite them to join with us in our efforts to spread the knowledge of Theosophy throughout the world. You are our Brothers. 'Love is the cement of the universe.' Should it not then unite us? The doors of the T.S. are open if ye will enter. We invite you to do so."The writers of the present series are in possession of gratuitous letters written by Mr. Fussell officially, after the death of Robert Crosbie, containing the grossest calumnies on the repute and character of the man to whom the United Lodge of Theosophists owes its existence, and to whom the thousands whom Mr. Fussell has the effrontery to address as "Brothers", look with reverence as a faithful Disciple and friend.
Mr. Fussell's idea and practice of "brotherhood" are on a par with Dr. de Purucker's own preachment and practice of "fraternization". Thus, on the one hand, he writes privately to Dr. Lischner of the treachery of Mrs. Besant, while on the other, he publicly pays court to her and her Adyar society, soliciting fraternal relations while that "treachery" still remains unacknowledged, unatoned for, repeated again and again. What measure of good faith can such double-dealing be granted? What degree of good faith can be accorded anyone whose conduct parallels the jesuitical concept that "the end justifies the means"? We may let Dr. de Purucker himself answer out of his own mouth. The Theosophical Forum for May, 1935, contains as part of the text of his "Seventeenth General Letter, Occasion: White Lotus Day Observance:""It is futile and entirely beside the mark to say, as some may perhaps say, that in pointing out the desperate wickedness of other Theosophists we are doing our Masters' work, in exposing wrong and fraud to the world. In no case would we be manifesting the true spirit of Charity and Fidelity to our Masters' admonitions were we to call a Brother-Theosophist by names suggesting ignominy, such as 'traitor', 'impostor', 'insincere', etc., etc.,"
COMPILER'S NOTE: The following is a separate item which followed the above article but was on the same page. I felt it was useful to include it here:
"IS DENUNCIATION A DUTY?"
Ready to lay down our life any day for THEOSOPHY ... and willing to shield, if need be, every true theosophist with our own body, we yet denounce as openly and as virulently the distortion of the original lines upon which the Theosophical Society was primarily built, and the gradual loosening and undermining of the original system by the sophistry of many of its highest officers... And we tremble at the thought that, unless many of our ways and customs, in the Theosophical Society at large, are amended or done away with, Lucifer will one day have to expose many a blot on our own scutcheon -- e.g., worship of self, uncharitableness, and sacrificing to one's personal vanity the welfare of other Theosophists....
"Severe denunciation is a duty to truth." It is; on condition, however, that one should denounce and fight against the root of evil and not expend one's fury by knocking down the irresponsible blossoms of its plant.... Our society has to be protected, as also its numerous members. This, again, would be only simple justice. A natural and truthful statement of facts cannot be regarded as "evil speaking" or as a condemnation of one's brother.
--H. P. BLAVATSKY: Lucifer, December, 1888.
(Part 10 of a 10-part series)
Back to the
series complete list of articles.
Back to the full listing containing all of the
"Additional Categories of Articles".
ONE (1) FOOTNOTE LISTED BELOW:
(1) Corrections, objections, criticisms, questions and comments are invited from all readers on any facts or conclusions stated in this series. --Editors, THEOSOPHY.
Back to text.