Theos-Talk Archives (February 2002 Message tt00039)

Sunday, February 03, 2002


Dear Jerry:

I think the pages of ISIS UNVEILED and the MODERN PANARION show
that H.P.Blavatsky was well acquainted with all the various
systems of religious philosophy from her most early New York
days. If I recall correctly Col. Olcott in OLD DAILY LEAVES,
Vol. 1 attests to this also. H P B attributes this to the
assistance that various Masters gave to her when she had to deal
with these matters either verbally or in writing. (I am
summarizing from memory and without references at hand.)

>From a study of ISIS UNVEILED, The SECRET DOCTRINE and numerous
of her articles, it is plain to me that THEOSOPHY is NOT a
pastiche culled by an expert mind from hundreds of manuscripts,
some unavailable except from special libraries, and in many
languages.

What emerges to this student, is a masterly ability to record
evidence of the existence of a prototypal single WISDOM, from
which all religious philosophies were derived, one after the
other. In addition there is evidence of that kind of scientific
OBSERVATION which is not a theoretical reconstruct in retrospect
concerning the formation of the Universe, our System and our
World, also of the evolution of intelligence on our world.

I would have enjoyed meeting H P B and speaking with her -- I
have not yet met in all these years any one with such a range of
knowledge and vision -- as depicted in her writings. I have seen
no comparable literature being issued, nor have I seen any
systematic refutation, or attack on the metaphysics and logic of
her presentation.

To verify what is currently being written against H P B and
discussing Theosophy with her. One has to be well acquainted
with the full range of the writings pro and con that have related
to Theosophy and its presentation down the years. It forms a
great volume of material. Much of our important scientific
advances have corroborated statements made by her on behalf of
Theosophy .

I grow tired of reading the literature that attacks H.P.Blavatsky
(not the philosophy) is repetitive of slander an innuendo much of
it issued while she was alive, and some after her death. Its
"old hat." Further, I would say that it is cowardly, since H P B
is given no chance to refute these attacks. What stature does
any one acquire who attacks the dead and the defenseless , and
especially one who only did good?

Either those who do the current attacking are unread, or they
deliberately refuse to grant any credence to observers who wrote
of what they saw, when they were on the scene. In other words we
do not have an "even" or a "level" field approach here. From
that point of view I would say it is not history but a very
opinionated, pedestrian and immature approach. I fail to fathom
the value of this tempest in a tea-cup.

That which strikes me as most significant is the fact that none
of the correspondents seem able or willing to discuss or attack
the philosophical, historical and scientific statements that H P
B has advanced, say, in The SECRET DOCTRINE .

Best wishes,

Dallas

-----Original Message-----
From: Gerald Schueler [mailto:gschueler@earthlink.net]
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 7:31 AM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Cc: theos-l@list.vnet.net
Subject: Theos-World Re to Brigitte


<<<However typical of the development of esoteric religiosity is
its eclecticism. For example since numerous systems exist that
that are build on the number seven, they are understood to be
freely interchangeable.

CUT