Jan 25, 2002 10:50 AM
by Kenneth Johnson
Steve asked why Theosophical fury had been directed
almost entirely at one author about HPB, leaving many
others unscathed although they were more critical or
hostile towards her.
Having pondered over this question a good deal, I
think it has to do with the nature of fundamentalist
rage. The primary targets are usually more liberal or
dissenting members of the same spiritual tradition.
Thus, fundie Baha'is passionately hate liberal Baha'i
scholars/authors, far more than any non-Baha'i
critics-- 100 to 1 in terms of the amount of invective
one finds on the Internet. Fundamentalist Christians
rave against liberal or scholarly Christians far more
than against non-Christians. Ditto with Mormonism,
Radhasoami, etc. etc. The author who comes from
within the faith tradition and then writes about it
from an etic rather than emic perspective is perceived
as a traitor, an internal enemy, a threat to the
(faith) community, and thus fair game for hostility.
The underlying fear is of *contagion.* Whereas
someone who writes far more critically but who has
never been a member attracts hardly any condemnation
Do You Yahoo!?
Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions!
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application