Theos-Talk Archives (July 2003 Message tt00162)

Hi,

I still don't think you present your case very well. What precisely 
was his negative effect? As for

> His teaching from the mentioned timeperiod was only suited for his
> followers. And even today some of his followers aught to do 
something else -
> so to learn MORE THAN ONE mode of teaching.
Precisely the fact that he did NOT claim to be an authority, makes it 
quite easy for his followers to study other material. They are left 
quite free to do so. 

Then again, you haven't quite read what I wrote. You say: 
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
theosophy@a...> wrote:
> He called the Masters of Theosophy an "illusion" publicly, but 
privately
> accepted their
> existence - or at least, what HE called his Masters. (Was this 
good ? I will
> question that.)
It was I who put the name "masters" on the "Them" who he said 
protected him and helped him keep his system clean. He did not use 
the word masters that much.

Katinka