Theos-Talk Archives (January 1999 Message tt00273)

Jan 23rd 1999

Dear Rich:		Re:  DEVACHAN

We surely are at cross purposes.  I repeat:  I am not interested
in the philology, and more than "Tony" is according to his latest
memo.

We are discussing (so far as I am concerned), not that HPB may be
right or wrong, superficially, in her choice of words, but
whether the meaning behind the words [ in this case "Devachan or
Deva-Chan ] used in Theosophical doctrine are valuable or not.

I brought up the chronology, so far as I am able to trace it, of
the use of this word.  I am not interested in linguistics.  I
place no special value on them.

No I am not changing the venue at all, in my esteem.

The divergence is what ?  Of what lasting value ?

Be content with your view, and let me be happy with mine.  Enough

Dallas.

==================================