Theos-World Re: Taking offense, seeking revenge
Jan 10, 2009 06:41 AM
Of course there was a huge falling out between Emma and HPB, after
which they were enemies. I think Emma was more reliable than HPB on
the issue of the adepts who inspired the original 1875 TS. If people
would read her books they might come to agree. Mathiesen's monograph
would be the most important supporting reading to help people
evaluate Emma. If her books are totally ignored, no one has the
chance to decide. You wrote:
> was founded, all the talk was of "Spirits." They were everywhere,
in everyone's mouth; and no one by any chance even dreamt of talking
about living "Adepts," "Mahatmas," or "Masters." One hardly heard
even the name of the Rosicrucians, while the existence of such a
thing as "Occultism" was suspected even but by very few. Now all that
is changed. We Theosophists were, unfortunately, the first to talk of
these things, to make the fact of the existence in the East
of "Adepts" and "Masters" and Occult knowledge known;
PJ: That is only true if you consider Emma Hardinge Britten the
firsts Theosophist to do so, as Ghost Land precedes Isis Unveiled by
5 years, and Art Magic by one year. They is absolutely full of
adepts, Theosophy, Rosicrucianism, etc. That's why Theosophists
nowadays don't read Emma's books, IMO, to retain the illusion that
Isis Unveiled was the first rather than third book by a Founder of
and now the name has become common property. It is on us, now, that
the Karma, the consequences of the resulting desecration of holy
names and things, has fallen. All that you now find about such
matters in current literatureâ??and there is not a little of itâ??all
is to be traced back to the impulse given in this direction by the
Theosophical Society and its Founders. Our enemies profit to this day
by our mistake. The most recent book directed against our teachings
is alleged to have been written by an Adept of twenty years'
standing. Now, it is a palpable lie. We know the amanuensis and his
inspirers (as he is himself too ignorant to have written anything of
the sort). These "inspirers" are living persons, revengeful and
unscrupulous in proportion to their intellectual powers; and these
bogus Adepts are not one, but several. The cycle of "Adepts," used as
sledge-hammers to break the theosophical heads with, began twelve
years ago, with Mrs. Emma Hardinge Britten's "Louis" of Art Magic and
PJ: Whom HPB has no difficulting whatsoever in citing frequently as a
scholarly authority under his real name!
and now ends with the "Adept" and "Author" of The Light of Egypt, a
work written by Spiritualists against Theosophy and its teachings.
PJ: The Hermetic Brotherhood of Luxor was an occultist rather than a
Spiritualist organization, and Emma was an occultist long before
Spiritualism existed, so this is misleading. But Emma was a
Spiritualist as well, so there is a grain of truth. But then she was
a Spiritualist when HPB was working with her daily as the TS was
> THEOSOPHIST. We denounce no one, leaving this noble task to our
enemies. The spiritualistic author of Art Magic, etc., may or may not
have been acquainted with such an Adept â?"
PJ: HPB knew exactly how well Emma knew Bunsen!
and saying this, I say far less than what that lady has said and
written about us and Theosophy for the last several years â?" that is
her own business. Only when, in a solemn scene of mystic vision, an
alleged "Adept" sees "spirits" presumably at Greenwich, England,
through Lord Rosse's telescope, which was built in, and never moved
from, Parsonstown, Ireland,* may well be permitted to wonder at the
ignorance of that "Adept" in matters of science.
PJ: And HPB knew well that Emma was no authority on matters of
history or science, that she was half- or more- author of Art Magic
and Ghost Land, as HPB herself was in daily communication with Emma
as they were being written. She knew that Emma's mistakes in the
book were no reflection on Ernest Bunsen's status as a scholar.
> So why should we sell just any book about the Masters and theosophy?
PJ: Who is "we?" Theosophists don't sell Emma's books, and I have not
suggested they should.
> And why promote Hardinge Britten?
PJ: Read the books and find out!
> There are limites to me accepting such ideas!
PJ: Accept ideas? I'm just suggesting that people should read Emma
to get some insight. Not that you individually ought to; read what
you like and don't be offended by others' reading proclivities.
> And I find H. P. Blavatsky to be in agreement with me.
PJ: The reasons HPB had in 1889 for dismissing Emma as someone to be
taken seriously on the subject of Theosophical Masters ought not be
reasons for Theosophists in 2009 to refuse to even read Emma. Most
especially THE FIRST TWO BOOKS PUBLISHED BY A FOUNDER OF THE TS after
its founding. Should their feud of 1884-1891 erase both their
collaboration from 1874-1883 and the interrelationships among their
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Frank Reitemeyer
> To: email@example.com
> Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 7:11 AM
> Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Taking offense, seeking revenge
> >I'd rather put my energy into recommending other authors like
> Hardinge-Britten, Bunsen, Burton, Aurobindo, who tie meaningfully
> into the work of HPB, than worry about discouraging people from
> reading authors whose books are connected with hers in a
> and delusional way.
> You know who I mean :) but let's not denounce them,
> Paul, not so hard to identify the person.
> Yes, he is not the overall supder duper perfect publisher.
> But considering the weak level of the TM in general he does good
> I wished I would find the energy to do only 10% of his work.
> The problem we all have is that so many are talking, but no
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application