What is sauce for
the goose is sauce for the gander??
(Original 2005 letter revised for web publication.)
Dear --------- [ULT student],
To help me understand YOUR POINT OF VIEW, I would ask you to give me your thoughts and opinion on the following.
When I publicly posted some extracts from one of HPB's Esoteric Instructions, you wrote me that you strongly protested my posting of these HPB quotations from an "esoteric" or "private" document.
You also suggested that such "posting" did an "injustice" to the Mahatmas.
Therefore I assume that if other writers besides me did something similar that you would ALSO object if not "protest" to a quoting of this esoteric material, right?
If your answer is yes, then I call your attention to the following:
The book titled The Theosophical Movement 1875-1925: A History and a Survey was written by the Editors of Theosophy Magazine (John Garrigues and other leading United Lodge of Theosophists associates) and published in 1925.
This book was sold for many years by the Theosophy Company and also sold by individual lodges of the ULT.
If you turn to Chapter XI, "The Work of the Esoteric Section", you will see that the ULT writers actually quote from two of HPB's esoteric documents.
The Editors of Theosophy magazine admit:
"Immediately following upon the publication in Lucifer of the Notice of the formation of the Esoteric Section, H.P.B. sent out to all applicants a formal communication, marked as were all subsequent papers of the Section, strictly private and confidential. " Italics added.
But then they write:
"Permissible extracts from the Preliminary Memorandum to the E.S. applicants show her esoteric treatment of the same problems...."
and then these writers proceed to quote certain paragraphs from this strictly private ES document.
Notice that they use the phrase: "permissible extracts. "
But the perceptive reader of this phrase might ask:
WHO decided that these extracts were permissible and could be quoted both in a PUBLIC magazine and PUBLIC book despite being in a document marked by HPB herself as "strictly private and confidential"??
But for our present discussion, the more important question is:
Do YOU object to this publication of these esoteric extracts by the editors of Theosophy magazine??
Dr. H.N. Stokes (Theosophist, Theosophical historian, and critic of Leadbeater's & Besant's "Neo-Theosophy") commented about "this quoting" as follows in his O.E. Library Critic Magazine:
"....why did the magazine 'Theosophy' in its series of articles later published as 'The Theosophical Movement' [that is, published 1925 as a book] quote from documents [written by H.P.B. and] marked private and issued to E.S.T. members under pledge of secrecy?
Are we to suppose that . . . the editors of 'Theosophy' Magazine, are above all rules applying to lesser mortals?
"No, what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander."
"If .... [HPB's esoteric documents] are [still] private documents today, no one without a diploma of sanctity and a special permit from the Mahatmas is more entitled to [quote from them or] read them than any others, or to discourage others from doing what he does himself when it suits his purpose ... ." Italics added.
So I ask you: who gave the editors of 'Theosophy' magazine permission to quote from HPB's Esoteric documents?
So would you ALSO say that the Editors of Theosophy magazine did an "injustice" to the Mahatmas by quoting this material?
Are the Editors of Theosophy magazine therefore "guilty" of the same offense you say I am "guilty" of?
I ask this in all seriousness.
Now another example.
In the book THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT 1875-1950 (1951 revised edition), the editors of Theosophy Magazine quote a great deal from JUDGES CIRCULAR OF NOV. 3, 1894.
See pp. 241-243 of this book which is also online at:
HISTORY OF THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT (1875-1950)
Notice that this Judge Esoteric document is headed:
"Strictly Private and only for E.S.T. Members."
I again ask you:
do you object to this publication by the editors of Theosophy magazine??
do you protest the quoting of this material?
And please remember this book is STILL sold by The Theosophy Company.
See the online catalog at:
And I have seen this book with the quoted ES material sold at ULT lodges.
Have you "protested" to the Theosophy Company and the ULT lodges about them selling a book that quotes "Strictly Private and only for E.S.T. Members" material?
Would you also say that the officials and editors at the Theosophy Company are doing an "injustice" to the Mahatmas by selling this book which quotes from a private EST document?
I ask you the above in all seriousness and am looking forward to your view and thinking on this matter.