THEOSOPHY AND ITS OPPONENTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXII, Issue 9712, 7 January 1895, Page 3

THEOSOPHY AND ITS OPPONENTS.

TO THE EDITOR. Sib,—ln regard to the " Theosophical Exposure," so-called, I notice that no one ventures to attack the real basis of modem Theosophy, namely, its standard works, Isis Unveiled," and " The Secret Doctrine" —or, if they are attacked, it is only by such opponents as, breathing an atmosphere impregnated with the intoxicating emanation of their self-conceit, after reading perhaps half-a-dozen pages, and not taking the trouble to understand the meaning of them, think they know much better and, shutting up the books, commence to expatiate contemptuous on the views of their author. Nevertheless, while those two monuments of occult) philosophy remain extant, imperfect though they may be, no one is going to upset Theosophy ; and to attempt to vilify such leaders as Mrs. Besant and her coadjutors as a means to that end, has for the past 19 years been a conspicuous failure. But it seems to be an innate idea in popular majorities, and those who cater for them, that they have a prescriptive right to insult those who are not of their temporary opinion; and who, setting no sort of value upon the opinions of those who only see one aide of the matter in dis- 1 pute, are denounced as "past reasoning with." In the meantime, however, our opponents might just as well, before charging us with credulity and folly, bear in mind that Uieosophists accept unreservedly the Views of no one, living or dead, and only value the contents of letters and books, whether originating from the Mahatmas or elsewhere, just in proportion to their own private estimate of the contents thereof; and when our opponents satisfactorily demonstrate that "Isis" and the "Secret Doctrine" ! ar j founded, upon bogus Mahatma messages, al }d show them to be false throughout, it will be time enough for us to bow to such proof. Meanwhile, the more those books are studied, the more satisfaction we find in them— the forgeries of endless pretenders to 'occult powers" would not make any difference to such' study. ' Sir, you have used your editorial privilege to cast > contumely upon all I'heosophists; but if -you are of that British nation which so greatly prides itself upon the fair play "it doesn't always practice, give us equal room to say what we may on our side—we are "the under dog" at present, and perhaps must therefore submit as best we may, but such a course does not commend itself to—Yours, etc., • s _. _ S. Stuart, F.T.S. ' ! View Road, Auckland, January 4, 1895.