Theos-Talk Archives (March 2001 Message tt00016)

teos9@aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 2/28/2001 9:41:21 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> bartl@sprynet.com writes:
> 
> > Well, when one considers that the "secret doctrine" (the doctrine
> > itself as opposed to Blavatsky's book about the secret doctrine) is the
> > correct interpretation of Theosophy, then Blavatsky didn't have it, the
> > Mahatmas didn't have it, and certainly those who came later didn't have
> > it.
> 
> Deeper and deeper we go Bart. How can we know if the actual "secret doctrine"
> is the "correct interpretation" if it's very secrecy, prohibits us from
> knowing anything at all about it?

Exactly.