Theos-Talk Archives (February 2006 Message tt00208)

robert_b_macd wrote:
> Your characterization of Carlos's position is unfair.  Carlos himself
> writes in post 29673 the following:
> "The main question is  publishing obvious LIES against HPB.
> Nothing against critizing her or talking about her many PERSONAL 
> faults, which the Masters did, by the way."
> His concerns are fairness to a woman's memory.  Even if you think he
> is over-zealous, it does not follow that he worships her.  That is
> simply a non-sequitor and thus simply your humble opinion on the matter.
	OK, now we're talking about what I wrote, rather than nasty character 
references.

	Pretending that a problem doesn't exist does not make the problem 
magically go away. For example, I have had a lot of problems over the 
years from Jewish groups who believe that the Theosophical Society is 
anti-Semitic (in the sense of hating Jews). I point out that Blavatsky's 
statements against Judaism refer only to the religion, and not the 
people, and are part of comments against most religions. I point out 
that many statements by Alice Bailey are wrongly attributed to 
Blavatsky. I have to deal with the fact that "Aryan" was used by people 
who wanted to prove that white Europeans were the superior race BEFORE 
Blavatsky, and also the embracing and twisting of Blavatsky's works by 
later white Christian supremacists, like the Thule Society, the Nazi 
Party, etc. I've had to deal with statements on this very list who 
believe that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a factual document. 
And, of course, I've had to deal with a little article in Fohat which 
COULD have simply defended a man's right to speak, but defended his 
scholarship and premises as well.

	But, be that as it may, pretending the past criticism of Blavatsky, no 
matter how unjustified, does not exist makes us sound too much like a 
religion. We need to answer the criticism, and, in order to answer it, 
we need to acknowledge that it exists.

	Therefore, when a person who objects to even acknowledging that the 
criticism exists refers to Blavatsky as a "Teacher", with a capital "T", 
I felt that it would be a good idea to point out that it came 
dangerously close, if not over the line, to treating Theosophy as a 
religion. I felt that the line from the Mahatma letters was the most 
effective way of doing so.

	And, as far as personal attacks go, I must remind you that you were the 
person who started in with the personal attacks and slurs.

	Bart