Theos-Talk Archives (June 1999 Message tt00055)

As a specialist in Tibetan studies (now having advanced to candidacy and 
receiving my degree in a few months) I can say that Gilbert's study is 
utterly inconclusive.  Gilbert is a nobody in the field, an anthropologist 
who hasn't a clue as to the actual DOCTRINES of Buddhism.

If HPB is so false to her Buddhist sources in Tibet, why have the Dalai Lama, 
the Panchen Lama, and many other bona fide Tibetan teachers written prefaces 
to her books, recommending them for study?

As my dissertation will show, Gilbert and others fail to understand that HPB 
uses Buddhist terms last century that couldn't even be found in dictionaries. 
 There is no way HPB could have has access to the teachings she gives except 
through FIRST-HAND instruction.

Whether her personal instruction took place in Tibet, in Bhutan, in Ladakh, 
in Nepal, in Assam, in Khotan, in Sahng-shung, in Gilgit, in Kashmir -- I 
truly could not care less.  I don't think HPB's travels can be documented one 
way or another, as K. Paul Johnson's flimsy books of hypotheses show.  Nor 
should we care.

HPB's works, in her written productions, prove her learning and worth.  Other 
than that, who cares?  For any who are interested, I have the first two 
chapters of my dissertation, "Blavatsky and Buddhism," prepared and ready to 
go.  This work *proves* using chronology and texts from last century, how HPB 
was unique and could not have drawn from any known Western sources last 
century.

Simply email me for a copy, and please agree to reimburse my printing and 
mailing costs (about $10 all together).  As a student, I've already sent out 
over a dozen copies and can't afford to continue to do it gratis.

Rich

-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.