[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]


Jul 17, 2006 10:18 AM
by carlosaveline


Thanks for your significant commentaries on the correspondence with Radha Burnier. 

No doubt, our brothers and sisters who are Krishnamurti followers seem to make a cult out of the idea of being "free from the past".  They seem to have forgotten the existence of the Law of Karma.  

If onw wants to have some degree of liberty from the past, or from karma, one has to start studying the effects of one's past actions, in order not to repeat the same old mistakes again and again. That is feasible. 

One of the worst ways of remaining stuck to the past is trying to deny it, or attempting to prevent people from learning from past events. 

Therefore Adyar TS could well admit its mistakes more openly and more honestly in order to have some more liberty to live the future.   

In this regard, Henry S. Olcott seems to have established a good example to be followed.  

A few months before dying, in a conversation with Laura Holloway, Olcott made a deep self-criticism.  

He then admitted his mistakes with regard to HPB and W. Q. Judge. He should have made that in a public way himself. But I guess he was somewhat depressed. Holloway's narrative suggests that. 

As to Ms. Radha,  in the past she has supported historical researchers;  and nothing prevents her from doing that again. 

Best regards,   Carlos. 


Data:Sun, 16 Jul 2006 22:33:57 -0000

Assunto:Theos-World Carlos, Radha, and The Judge Case

> Sorry folks, my previous post seems to be lacking in formatting so I try
> again.
> Carlos Aveline and Radha Burnier have been corresponding with respect to
> re-opening The Judge Case. Carlos recently sent me his follow up letter
> to Radha's response. I wanted to make a few comments on the contents of
> this exchange.
> Carlos started as follows:
> Like our previous letters, this is an open text dealing with
> public issues.
> In April 2006, I wrote you about the importance of Adyar Theosophical
> Society re-examining and repairing the injustice done to William Judge
> in 1894-95. In May 22nd, you kindly answered:
> "Dear Brother Aveline,
> I am in receipt of your letter of 13 April, and thank you for the
> suggestions made. Being confined to a small area, at least physically,
> perhaps you do not realize how much work there is to be done for the
> dissemination of Theosophy, and strengthening bonds of brotherhood
> everywhere. I do not see the point of reopening the Judge case and
> using one's time and energy on events long past. Except for a few
> people like you, nobody is preoccupied with past affairs, because they
> are more
> focused with the work to be done now.
> With best wishes, yours fraternally, Radha Burnier."
> Assuming Radha to be a fair individual with no agenda, her response must
> be understood in the following manner. Presumably, Carlos presented an
> argument for opening the Judge Case. Radha responded that she was not
> persuaded by the argument and consequently felt that her efforts would
> be more wisely placed in other areas of work. What we do not know is
> why Radha felt unmoved by Carlos' arguments. In addition, I am not
> certain as to why Radha felt that she had to personally do anything
> other than make an executive decision to allow responsible historians
> into the archives. Those historians who are presumably interested in
> the case would be doing all the work. If Radha chose to, she could
> ignore the whole debate and continue focussing "on the work to be done
> now." By denying access, this demonstrates paradoxically, that Radha is
> indeed interested in past affairs and is willing to expend time and
> resources in fending off responsible historians' free access to the
> archives. It would seem then that the obvious course of action would be
> to pin down Radha's objections to the arguments put forward by Carlos,
> ask her to do nothing other than make an executive decision to allow
> access to the archives, and point out the paradox of refusing to do so.
> After discussing the history of the Movement, Carlos brings forward the
> following point:
> As to the danger in keeping the wrong kind of secrets, please take
> into consideration this sentence from the full text of the 1900 Letter,
> which is said to have been sent by one of the Masters to Annie Besant,
> but which was kept secret by Adyar as long as Adyar could:
> It is important to consider, here, that such a sentence does not refer
> necessarily to the physical death blow. For a spiritual organization,
> moral and ethical death is worse than the physical one.
> I am not suggesting that Adyar is morally dead; yet I believe that its
> vitality – and the vitality of the theosophical movement as a whole
> – suffers badly from various unresolved issues in the past. The
> fact is that one can only get rid of the past after one learns the
> lessons from it. "Liberty from the past" cannot be an escape
> from it, nor its denial.
> The quote from "The Letters From the Masters of the Wisdom" series is
> often attributed to a genuine Mahatma Letter. When this letter is read
> as coming from an elemental reflecting back at Besant all her doubts and
> concerns from that time, it reads equally fascinating. Instead of a
> warning from the Master we read Besant's concern that her "MISLEADING
> SECRECY" is going to destroy the Society. Besant is telling us that she
> has been misleading the Society.
> Further, the above concerns about learning the lessons of the past is
> considered in my previous post:
> This post makes it clear why these injustices of the past have to be
> addressed and why they are considered by some as the MOST IMPORTANT
> theosophical work of our time.
> After further discussing the history of the Movement, Carlos makes the
> following observations:
> It is amazing how useful History can be. The more we learn from
> the past, the more liberty we have from it.
> Due to the importance of the Adyar TS for the movement as a whole, the
> effects of its past mistakes have extended their influence over the
> ever-changing "present time" of the movement, from the 1890s
> through 2006. And this influence may take some more time to find its due
> karmic compensation.
> At this point, as a student, I must say that I deeply and sincerely
> thank you, Ms. Radha, for something I consider of real importance.
> I will always recognize – provided you do not change your position
> – the fact that you kept away from the attempt, led by your
> vice-president John Algeo, to adopt as part of the theosophical
> literature, and in fact as part of H. P. Blavatsky's own writings, a
> collection with some of the worst
> and most infamous libels and slanders ever fabricated against H.P.B.
> A shameful act indeed, perpetrated by your vice-president. I wonder how
> that could ever happen to the Adyar T. S. Whatever the answer, Ms.
> Radha, at least your June 2004 letter about Mr. Algeo's spurious
> volume of "HPB Letters" helps clarify the facts to the many
> honest students who are
> members of the Adyar TS.
> Although it is regrettable that you could not stop Mr. John Algeo, your
> 2004 letter to me is significant because it shows that he does not have
> your "presidential blessings" to slander H.P.B., or to unjustly
> attack her in the poorly disguised way he did.
> Circulating old lies and criminal slanders against Helena Petrovna –
> and doing this in the name of a "Theosophical" Publishing House 
> – is certainly a strong sign that History lessons have been
> forgotten.
> I think it is valuable that Carlos brought up this paraphrasing of
> Radha's stance with respect to "The Letters". It will be valuable to
> have her confirm this understanding as another reading of her stance
> might be that of indifference. Could it be that she does not endorse
> Algeo's editorial stance because she doesn't care? Perhaps Radha is
> more interested in Krishnamurti and his teachings and perceives all this
> Blavatsky nonsense as a distractions from "the work to be done now."
> Finally Carlos ends by bringing the focus back to Judge:
> The same happens with the ambiguous position of the Adyar TS about
> the persecution against William Judge. Thinking of this, I wrote to
> you and suggested that the Adyar TS could either show proofs of
> Judge's guilt or declare him innocent of "forging messages
> from the Mahatmas".
> In the meantime, as no one should be afraid of truth, historians and
> researchers could be authorized by you to examine related documents in
> the Adyar Archives.
> In taking such important decisions, you might consider that even the
> Vatican, under John Paul II, has apologized for its past mistakes made
> many centuries ago with regard to the Jewish people, to the American
> indigenous peoples, to individuals considered "heretics", etc. 
> I hope Adyar can follow that example sooner than later.
> Carlos points out the minimum that should be expected from Adyar,
> getting out of the way of the historians and challenging Adyar to
> surpass this low bar as set by the Catholic Church in recognizing the
> wrongs of the past. I hope the president is not preoccupied by the
> important "work to be done now".
> Bruce
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra.
> Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 14/07/2006 / Versão: 4.4.00/4807
> Proteja o seu e-mail Terra:

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application