Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00406)

Hi. This is not so much for Daniel, but for everyone: The interview is
funny, sad, pathetic and poignant. Some of what he says is TRUE, and a lot
is distorted, reactive gibberish, but who even cares? He is IGNORANT, in my
opinion, as are some of the people on here. Maybe you have all attracted
each other (and me). I am glad you put this out here, but don't worry. No
one who is SIGNIFICANT will be attracted to him and his words.

There is no way to sort stuff like this out, and it is not even necessary to
do so. Have a good laugh and let it go. This is a recent piece, as he is
referring to a lot of material that was just posted. Maybe he was frustrated
and angry with ME, or maybe he pretended to be so wounded by me because he
knew he would be leaving this list after doing the interview, anyway, and he
threw in a guilt trip for goodby. When you discovery enquiry and the joy of
Work, none of this will concern you any longer

Bag, if you are reading this, which I know you are, even a Roman Catholic
can do the exercise of impartial self observation. Maybe you should give
this exercise a try. Wry

----- Original Message -----
From: "D. Caldwell" <comments@blavatskyarchives.com>
To: "Theosophy Study List" <theos-l@list.vnet.net>
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 7:21 PM
Subject: BAG is interviewed by Eric Wynants about Theosophy


> BAG is interviewed by Eric Wynants about Theosophy.
>
> Theos-Talk subscribers may be interested in what BAG has now said
> about Theosophy and even members of Theos-Talk in an interview at:
>
> http://www.raphaelvishanu-world.at/thoughtsystems.html
>
> BAG, I have several questions for you.
>
> (1) Did you write all of the text that is attributed to you in the
> above interview?
>
> (2) Do you know who Eric Wynants is?
>
> (3) You said:
>
> "They cannot even produce a systematized statement of Theosophy that
> all of the Theosophical splinter groups subscribe to. Daniel Caldwell
> presented only the doctrines of his sect of Theosophy, but how can we
> accept him as the spokesman of the one true faith ?"
>
> Please BAG, can you explain exactly what you mean by your above
> statement? What is MY "sect" of Theosophy? And what do you mean by
> the "one true faith"? Unfortunately, you apparently did not present
> this statement on Theos-Talk so I could respond to it.
>
> (4) I call the attention of Theos-Talk members to the following
> statement by BAG about Theosophists (I assume he is referring in part
> to Theos-Talk members):
>
> "My conclusion to the whole 'debate' is that these people are
> incapable of carrying on a meaningful discussion on any of the
> issues, because they cannot even use the language or concepts in any
> meaningful way that has relevance out-side of their thought-system.
> They are only capable of speaking to each other in the corrupted
> jargon categories that they have learned, and are incapable of
> understanding the plain direct normal meaning of words."
>
> (5) Here is another gem from the interview:
>
> "If we accept such a patently dishonest use of sources, then what is
> the value of any communication with such people ?"
>
> It should also be pointed out that if you look up the website that is
> hosting this interview you find some interesting information:
>
> http://www.raphaelvishanu-world.at
> Editor: Dr.Raphael Vishanu
> Research Director: Eric Wynants
>
> If you do a domain search of raphaelvishanu-world.at at:
>
> http://www.nic.at/en/help/help/su_suche.asp
>
> you will see Brigitte Muehlegger associated with the registration of
> the domain.
>
> Daniel H. Caldwell
> BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
> http://hpb.cc
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to theos-l as: wry1111@earthlink.net
> List URL - http://list.vnet.net/?enter=theos-l
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-theos-l-30975D@list.vnet.net