Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00811)

But these "assertions" are not necessarily attributable to HPB or the so 
called Masters. What has the beliefs or assertions of later leaders of the 
TS, or interpretations of post Blavatsky theosophical writers have to do with 
the original theosophical teachings themselves? To confuse the original 
teachings of Theosophy or the aims and purposes of the Theosophical Movement 
with the Theosophical Society (TS) -- and use such "evidence" as a basis of 
argument against the validity of the teachings of HPB and the Masters -- is 
actually setting up a "straw man." 

LHM 

In a message dated 11/20/02 5:51:04 AM, bhakti.eohn@verizon.net writes:

>WHAT ARGUMENT ? WHAT 'STRAW MAN' ? PROPOSTION # 1. BELOW IS A 
>STATEMENT OF ASSERTIONS FOUND IN THEOSOPHICAL SOURCES THEMSELVES. 
>
>--- In theos-talk@y..., Bart Lidofsky <bartl@s...> wrote:
>> Bhakti Ananda Goswami wrote:
>> > 
>> > WHAT WERE THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY MASTERS THE MASTERS OF ?
>> 
>> A body of knowledge.
>> 
>> > THEOSOPHICAL PROPOSITIONS
>> > 
>> > 1. THE ONLY TRUE PHILOSOPHY OF THE EARTH, THEOSOPHY IDENTIFIED AS
>> > BUDDHISM, IS FOUND IN THE MAHATMAS' LETTERS, AND THESE LETTERS ARE
>> > THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF ESOTERIC / OCCULT OR HIGHER WISDOM FOR
>> > THEOSOPHISTS. NEXT TO THESE LETTERS, THE "STANZAS OF DYZAN" ARE 
>OF
>> > CANONICAL IMPORTANCE TO THEOSOPHISTS.
>> 
>> Straw man argument. The rest of your message bcomes 
>meaningless.
>> 
>> Bart Lidofsky