[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Steve Stubbs on the Hodgson Report

Feb 06, 2003 07:04 PM
by Steve Stubbs " <>

--- In, "Daniel H. Caldwell 
<inquire@b...>" <inquire@b...> wrote:
> I really wonder what material Steve has or has not read and studied 
> on the Hodgson Report. 

I cannot spare the time to get into a long war about Hodgson. 
Suffice it to say that the way Theosophists deal with his Report does 
not satisfy me, but that their premise (i.e., that it is badly 
flawed) is, in my judgement correct. One Theosophist I read said he 
was "hopping mad" that Hodgson did not share his fundamentalist views 
about Blavatsky and the mahatmas. Why he thought his mental state 
would be of any interest to anyone except him, or why he thought it 
would have any critical value in evaluating the Report escapes me. 
If that satisfies some people, then those writers have not written in 
vain. I prefer a different approach. I don't see how fist pounding 
and angry rhetoric and irrelevant distraction and misdirection 
techniques can lead to any real sense of satisfaction that one has 
found the truth, but maybe that is just me.

K. Paul Johnson had been good enough to inform me that he discussed 
the Report briefly in his book INITIATES OF THEOSOPHICAL MASTERS. I 
have seen and read TMR, but not INITIATES, so was not aware of this 
and cannot comment on it. He says people can see excerpts of the 
book having to do with Hodgson on the web site if they 
want to know what he thinks about the Report.

If Djual Khul was known to the Theosophists in his worldly identity 
without them knowing that person was secretly Djual Khul, then it is 
quite likely that DK (Djual Khul) was DK (Damodar K. Mavalankar.) I 
suspect that all the mahatmas and chelas were known to the 
Theosophists in their worldly personas without anyone except the 
innermost circle knowing that those folks were also the mahatmas. 
There are a number of minor coincidences which suggest the identity 
of DK and DK, and one major one, namely, that Damodar was the only 
Theosophist of any significance who would have been nicknamed "the 
Disinherited." Unfortunately, the identification cannot be made 
conclusively, because on occasion Olcott and others spoke of the two 
as different persons. This may mean what it appears to mean, or it 
may be that they were putting out red herrings to keep people from 
making the obvious association, just as they did with KH and Morya. 
After all these years it is highly unlikely we will ever know for 
sure. Anyway,m the Report contains an interesting account of jpw 
Damodar came to be "the Disinherited."

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application