Theos-Talk Archives (July 2001 Message tt00144)

>Thank you for the details and opinions you send. I now have a
>chance to see how the matter originated. It is puzzling to us
>after all those years.

Dear Dallas, yes, it is puzzling, but we Theosophists should work it out for
ourselves.

>I can send you a copy of the Bio-notes prepared from Mr.
>Crosbie's own hand in case you desire to see them for comparison.
>Let me know.

That would be very nice. As you perhaps know I have an archives here and
like to have all, no matter in which way one can/should/must read it or not.
I mail you private my address.

>I am sure that those differences of opinion have already been
>discussed before our time. By the various people involved,
>including those who first authored the books you and I quote
>from.

Sure. In The Eclectic Theosophist there is a report printed, that during the
1931 Centennary in London the Point Loma staff met with that from the ULT
and the ULT officials were shown the unpublished "diary" notes of WQJ with
the result that they regarded them as genuine. That was over 70 years
back!!! Two generations!! What has happened since then? NOTHING!!
The ULT members are not informed about new results. Why? Because the facts
are not in that way they prefer?
Are Theosophists not pledged to fight for Truth?
I for one would the ULT much more respect (I do not unrespect them, although
I have much to criticize) when they would say: OK, there is new evidence and
he have to correct some older details, rather then to play ostrich.

>I am sure that there are severe differences of opinion. I also
>think we are not going to able to settle them soon, but there is
>no sense in my mind in carrying a feud forward.

But what are the reasons which prevents the ULT officials not to be able to
make public what in 1931 was clear?
I am also not interested in feuds. But I sound my voice since the ULT way is
presented as agood example for the whole Movement to follow. I want the
truth and not cementary peace.

>All I can say for the moment is "read the actual documents." See
>if we can make sense of the differences noted. Any one can do
>that and our opinions may not have so much effect, in any case as
>we hope.

Does that mean you support research in that direction in which Mrs. Geiger
1931 in London checked the sources?
Does that mean that ULT officials will make this reasearch transparent and
publish in in the ULT magazine?
That would every ULT associate give the opportunity to decide for
him-/herself whether Robert Crosbie or Katherine Tingley is right or both
are right or both are wrong.

>We have THEOSOPHY to study and a review of how the older
>generation handled matters between themselves can hardly be
>settled by us in their absence.

That is a weak excuse. Theosophy is not only a dead intellectual, technical
learning as you know. It is a living thing. Living Theosophy is developed by
living humans and it is humans you compose the Theosophical Movement and in
which way they profit from their actual insight into Theosophy.
If your argument above is serious then you must be against researches and
biographies about HPB as she is also dead now.
Why then you have not protested when the ULT member Sylvia Cranston wrote
about matters of HPB in her absence???
No, that is no argument.
Furthermore there are always new generations who have the rihgt to know what
happened in the past. Also studing the past events can help to learn from
old mistakes, f.e. to give the usual member more information freedom or that
altering books and historicals events is not good in the long run as every
truth comes out someday. Karma works even for Theosophists!

>Let there be peace.

Let there be truth. Where truth is, there is peace, too.
Living with lies is a kind of violence.
Peace is more than absence from war.
Or did not the Master Jesus kicked out the liers from the Temple?
Did not Jesus say: I am not coming to bring peace, but the sword (of
discrimination)?
Was not HPB fighting hard against lies?

Best, Frank