Theos-Talk Archives (February 2002 Message tt00071)

--- In theos-talk@y..., "redrosarian" <redrosarian@y...> wrote:
> --- In theos-talk@y..., "kpauljohnson" <kpauljohnson@y...> wrote:
> > But that does't change the fact that her site presents the *only*
> > significant new research on HPB to appear in years (AFAIK).
> 
> Her "new" research 

Whoa, wait a minute. First, I was referring not just or even 
primarily to Brigitte's own research, but also to that of 
Viswanathan, Bevir, etc. How much has any of their work been 
prefigured by anyone else? Published when, by whom? As for 
Brigitte's research on the Aryan League, Henderson memorandum etc., 
how has that repeated what anyone else had done? It certainly went 
beyond what I had done and I know of no one else who had even gone 
into these matters before.

is a regurgitation of the articles said by many 
> critics against Blavatsky.

What articles?

Brigitte has gone over many of the 
> contentions that Walter A. Carrithers, Jr. was able to expose in 
> 1947.

What is wrong with going over "contentions" that someone 
supposedly "exposed?" What does it even mean to expose a contention?
I could see your point if she were reiterating *arguments* that had 
been definitively *refuted*. And definitively means more than just 
lulling *Theosophists* into complacency, but actually persuading 
disinterested parties. By that standard, no Theosophical apologist 
has ever refuted anybody successfully AFAIK.

It's almost as if Brigitte has traced the same footprints as 
> did Gertrude Marvin Williams. What's new about that?
> 
> Nothing new under the sun,
> MNS

I guess your mind is made up, but a single fact that someone else 
might consider: no one before Viswanathan has approached the Mahatma 
Letters from the standpoint of how they illumine and are illumined by 
colonialism. 

PJ