Re: K. Paul Johnson on HPB, the Mahatmas, Buddhism and Tibet
May 05, 1998 05:33 PM
by Jerry Schueler
> If these observations are
>more or less true, do they negate any of the claims
>put forward by HPB and the Mahatmas?
>Does Alexandra David-Neel's account seriously
>invalidate the alleged precipitation of letters from the
>Masters M and KH? If so, why? If not, why?
No, she merely reported what was told to her by a group of
Adepts. These were apparently of a different school.
>Why should we believe these Tibetan lamas? Do these
>Tibetan lamas interviewed by Alexandra David-Neel have
>misconceptions or biases? Etc. Etc.
I think that they were speaking for the majority of Lamas
at that time. Today, of course, their "secret" teachings are
being dispensed everywhere in print.
>Another example: One well known Blavatsky student has
>asked the current Dalai Lama if he knew of the
>BOOK OF DZYAN. The Dalai Lama said he knew of no
>such book in the Tibetan religious writings. What can
>we reasonably conclude from this? Etc. Etc.
I believe him. We would have heard of some kind of
confirmation, is such existed. This remains a big
problem and makes me wonder just how much of her
"translation" was from historical records and how much
from reading so-called akashic records. Even if she
made the whole thing up (which is doubtful) it remains
>I hope everyone (on both sides of the issues) will challenge
>their own thinking and assumptions. Let's have a thoughtful,
>calm discussion even if some of us have disagreements.
Agreed. As I study Tibetan works I begin to see ever more
disagreement. Apparently HPB took what she wanted from
Tibetan sources just as she did with other sources.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application