Theos-Talk Archives (April 2004 Message tt00519)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bartl@s...> wrote:


> ali_haq_hassan wrote:


> > I'd be interested to know that too. I don't think she went off 


> > half-cocked as you imply...but it's possible. My opinion is that 
they 


> > actually instructed her to do some showmanship for the very 
attention 


> > it would draw....contrary to the history of the secret teachings- 
for 


> > the purpose of establishing the TS exoterically...and as a needed 
slap 


> > to the ultra-materialistic elements in science.


> 


> To do so, I'm going to give away an important professional 
secret of 


> stage magicians; 




<snip well known important secret>




> In the case of Blavatsky, however, people tended to observe a 
mite TOO 


> well. In a number of cases, the "tells"; things that do not really 
make 


> sense if the magic was real, but make a lot of sense if the magic is 


> faked are part of the description. As far as the Mahatmas' 
involvement, 


> there are indications that they were not at all happy with this:




Okay, you build up the magic-shtick approach to why you think the 
Mahatmas were displeased with HPB- so why do you use the following as 
an example when it has nothing to do with your point whatsoever?





> ----


> Letter #54


> Such is the true history, and facts with regard to her "deception" 
or, 


> at best -- "dishonest zeal." No doubt she has merited a portion of 
the 


> blame; most undeniably she is given to exaggeration in general, and 
when 


> it becomes a question of "puffing up" those she is devoted to, her 


> enthusiasm knows no limits. Thus she has made of M. an Apollo of 


> Belvedere, the glowing description of whose physical beauty, made 
him 


> more than once start in anger, and break his pipe while swearing 
like a 


> true -- Christian; and thus, under her eloquent phraseology, I, 
myself 


> had the pleasure of hearing myself metamorphosed into an "angel of 


> purity and light" -- shorn of his wings. We cannot help feeling at 
times 


> angry, with, oftener -- laughing at, her. Yet the feeling that 
dictates 


> all this ridiculous effusion, is too ardent, too sincere and true, 
not 


> to be respected or even treated with indifference.




This is a frowning, not even an indictment of her overwhelming 
guru-devotion, nothing to do with materializations and apparitions, 
yes? Are you trying a logical sleight-of-hand with me here?


Where's the rabbit, Bart?




regards-




Ali