Theos-Talk Archives (December 1997 Message tt00007)

>DANIEL CALDWELL REPLIES:
>
>Thanks Brenda for your comments.

Why do you thank me for my comments and then tell me to "shut up?"

Yes, I did ask Bruce why he
>choose to believe Steiner over HPB.  I assume he had good reasons
>for such a choice.* I simply wanted to know what those reasons were.*
>I can't read minds.  And Bruce has the choice whether he wants
>to share those reasons or not.  It is also equally true that I don't care
>whether
>Bruce or Mickey Mouse made the statements, I was interested in the issues
>and "facts" behind the statements.

I don't care for this comment at all. You are just recapping with a lot of
nonsense.

You DID NOT ask for facts, Daniel. You asked this and these are your words,
"I was focusing on the statement and asking is it true or not." You can ask
if a statement is true to you (this is introspection), but when someone
else "believes it" it is as much as saying it is "true" to them. (This is
daring to condemn another's beliefs by saying they are not based on facts.)

>
>BRENDA TUCKER WRITES:
>>What I see as a difference in the two illustrations above is that Johnson
>>does his ruffling in a standard method, he wrote a book. You choose to do
>>your ruffling with an audience that may or may not speak their minds, and
>>then demand answers from the party you are accusing.
>
>DANIEL CALDWELL WRITES:
>Well, it is a different medium of communication.  But so what?
>Again the audience has the decision either to speak or not speak their
>minds. As to Bruce, yes, he makes serious charges against HPB.  Maybe
>the charges are true, maybe not.  The pro and con needs to be aired out
>and let the chips fall where they may.  It seems like Bruce was holding
> his own and trying to be informative.

Yes, yes, you are the champion of negative charges against HPB. Well, I
like to read people's opinions, sometimes see them change, be corrected
even. But have yours ever changed? You are the eternal champion. Bruce's
comments are very serious in your eyes and now mine have become so serious
to you, too because it is an insult for anyone to voice their opinion if it
isn't done according to your beliefs and strict forum. Well, maybe you
could change, Daniel. I don't want to read your mind either and see your
opinions of people on this list because I realize discussion always
revolves around this one issue with you. I just want you to take my
contribution for what it is worth. My main comment was this and I'll repeat
it because I think this kind of exchange is very tedious. (Brenda Tuckers
says, Daniel Caldwell answers..... This is not my cup of tea.)

When the Masters are active in your life, you are credible whether you are
the first one to ever see them and speak to them or the fifth or the tenth.
When we live in tune with the hierarchy we are fulfilling an aspect of the
Divine Plan whether it is in consort with one issue or thousands of issues.
Believe in the adepts. Don't believe in the humans. This is very simple.


>BRENDA TUCKER WRITES:
>>My difficulty here is that you say that you are doing historical research
>>and yet this is not theosophy. Theosophy is living the teachings. Why do we
>>have to be bound by your love and yen for history? The rules there are
>>certainly different than they would be for students of the wisdom.
>>. . .  .
>>This is all I'm really interested in, kind of. I really find history droll.
>
>DANIEL CALDWELL WRITES:
>
>Certainly, "living the teachings" is part of the Theosophical life.  But I
>believe Theosophy is more than just that, even though that is a very
>important part of the whole ball of wax.
>
>No, Brenda, you do not have to be bound by my "love and yen for
>history".  Ignore my posts if they bore or upset you.  Neither do I
>have to be "bound" by your lack of interest in Theosophical history.
>
>But Bruce and I were discussing certain aspects of Theosophical
>history, i.e. certain alleged "facts" concerning HPB's life.  If you're
>not interested in that, please "turn the channel" and find something
>more to your liking.  Is that so difficult to do?

You were discussing a lot of things and in front of many people who may
wish to talk with you on this subject or they may wish that you change the
subject. Are you able to EVER change the subject?

>Brenda, I'm not trying to be difficult in what I've said above.  I am simply
>trying to be forthright and honest with you.  Can you appreciate that?

No. I object to anything you might do from a human standpoint. Can't you
manifest the adepts instead? Of course, there is a balance that's necessary
here, too. Occasional human glimpses are very valuable.

Brenda