Theos-Talk Archives (April 2004 Message tt00598)

Dear Pendragon,

Thank you very much for saying what needs to be said about the 
Blavatsky bashing that goes on with such abandon. It is inevitable 
that the negative pole will try to assert itself, but as long as 
there are those who are willing to state the truth, such as you have, 
the balance can at least be maintained.

Adelasie

On 18 Apr 2004 at 22:50, Pendragon wrote:

> To whom it may concern
> (to all of us):
> 
> That we were a hundred years ago, and ever since up to the very
> present, capable of dissecting HPB as if she were a corpse with
> contagious disease-the Mother of the movement who gave her life for
> you and for me and for all of us, and were neither then nor now
> ashamed of what we were doing, will bring a corresponding judgement on
> the heads of all of us. Ignorance of the law cannot save us even from
> secular justice; how much more are we----occultists, who pledged
> ourselves to the strictest of all laws, KARMA----amenable to the
> eternal that know no exception or favoritism, and demand from us all,
> regardless of person, creed or arrogance, to "honor father and mother,
> that thou mayest long upon the face of the earth"? Do we not know the
> law of discipleship that postulates that he "who does not wipe off the
> filth from the body of a parent, shall not see the morrow fare well
> with him"? Are we so totally blind to the fact that to us, HPB stands
> in the position of the Master-----and thus, for the White Lodge
> collectively? I beg all of us to have at least elementary decency in
> our hearts, normal even for the exoteric masses, if we are so
> absolutely incapable of keeping the laws of occultism----let us have
> just a little loyalty and respect for the one who tried to save us,
> and whom we crucified in return. Let us stop analyzing, let alone
> publishing, real or faked stories or '"documents" that allege to show
> our mother in a demeaning light, whatever the issue-----or rather
> apperance. Not for her sake, but for our very own sake and the sake of
> our childrens' children----all Humanity.
> 
> In brotherhood ansd sadness,
> 
> Pendragon
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Daniel H. Caldwell" <danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com>
> To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 1:43 PM
> Subject: Theos-World Bart on Blavatsky's supposed trickery: Where did
> the trickery end??
> 
> 
> > Bart,
> >
> > You wrote:
> >
> > ==============================================
> > I believe that what I said was that some of the
> > reports of her [HPB's] magic had details that were consistent
> > with magic tricks, and odd if it were the real thing.
> > In any case, I conclude from that, and her tendency to
> > exaggerate, that she used trickery to attract
> > attention. . . . In other words, in my opinion, at
> > the very worst, she used magic tricks to attract attention,
> > and it was a mistake to do so. . . .
> > ==============================================
> >
> > But, Bart, where did the trickery END and the genuine
> > BEGIN??
> >
> > Did she use trickery ALSO when it came to the appearances
> > of her Masters?
> >
> > See the following page:
> >
> > http://blavatskyarchives.com/muhleggerwrote2.htm
> >
> > or
> >
> > http://theosophy.info/muhleggerwrote2.htm
> >
> > If she did trickery in order to attract attention,
> > certainly her claim about the Masters gained her
> > worldwide attention. So are you suggesting that the
> > trickery extended to even the appearances of her Masters?
> >
> > And if you really believe she used trickery, why stop
> > with that?
> >
> > Did she use the Coulombs to drop letters from the Masters
> > through a hole in the ceiling?
> >
> > But it was also the testimony of the Coulombs that she
> > employed Mr. Coulomb to impersonate a Mahatma.
> >
> > In the opinion of skeptical magicians (like the Amazing
> > Randi??) ALL of her phenomena were consistent with
> > trickery. As far as I know, Randi has never seen a
> > paranormal event that he didn't beleive was really due
> > to trickery or to some other normal explanation. So I
> > suspect he would label all of Blavatsky's phenomena as
> > trickery or some other kind of delusion.
> >
> > Bart, it would be interesting to know if you believe any
> > of Blavatsky's phenomena were real and not trickery.
> > And exactly how do you distinguish between the genuine
> > and the spurious?
> >
> > How does one judge if a phenomenon is real thing or
> > just trickery?
> >
> > I believe you have brought this subject up before but
> > have never shared your indepth thinking on the subject.
> >
> > Daniel
> > http://hpb.cc
> > http://theosoophy.info
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>