Theos-Talk Archives (August 2004 Message tt00748)

Pedro,

Thanks for your latest reply.

I too like the two quotes you give and
certainly agree with them.

But even when considering the implications of what
those two quotes point toward, 
we STILL have the OTHER various statements by
Master KH and and HPB that I have
given in my post at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/18249

What are the IMPLICATIONS of what they
were writing in THOSE instances?

Are you suggesting that what HPB and KH
were writing was or is meaningless?

When KH and HPB wrote about:

"wild and fanciful speculation" about Theosophy

"erroneous notions" about Theosophy

"garbled and distorted versions" of Theosophy

"false ideas" grafted onto Theosophy

"disfigured" expositions of Theosophy

"imitations of Occultism and Theosophy"

they must have been trying to convey SOMETHING....
somemeaning....

What were they GETTING AT?

And what could we reasonably conclude 
from these statements?

Either they were making some kind of
POINT or we just have meaningless words?

Pedro, you also comment:

"An independent observer might see that 
your attitude to Theosophy and 
its 'original teachings' is becoming 
increasingly theological, 
sectarian and crystallized."

Maybe so but may not.

But I did NOT write these statements.
HPB and KH did.

Are you suggesting to us that you
view these statements by HPB and KH
as "theological, sectarian and crystallized"?

You also state:

"You may go on with your campaign to denounce the writings of Annie 
Besant and C. W. Leadbeater as 'garbled and distorted versions' of 
Theosophy, but please don't expect me to be a part of it."

But Pedro it was you yourself who brought up to Dallas the
issue of original teachings.

And these statements that I posted certainly suggest that
both KH and HPB knew of an original teaching and they were more
than willing to point out and even correct erroneous and mistaken 
notions that "garbled" or "distorted" the original.

When HPB writes of FALSE ideas, surely we could
reaonably conclude that there were OTHER ideas that
she considered TRUE. Or was she just writing 
meaningless nonsense?

All I was trying to get from you was YOUR opinion on
what HPB and KH were writing about in these instances.

But I guess I must conclude that you are as reticent
to deal with this topic as you are reticent to deal
with the evidence concerning Mr. Leadbeater's birth date.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc













--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "prmoliveira" <prmoliveira@y...> 
wrote:
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel H. Caldwell" 
> <danielhcaldwell@y...> wrote:
> 
> 
> > But as far as I can tell, you have chosen to
> > ignore the serious issues to be found in what both
> > Madame Blavatsky and the Mahatma Koot Hoomi
> > wrote about:
> > 
> > "wild and fanciful speculation" about Theosophy
> > 
> > "erroneous notions" about Theosophy
> > 
> > "garbled and distorted versions" of Theosophy
> > 
> > "false ideas" grafted onto Theosophy
> > 
> > "disfigured" expositions of Theosophy
> > 
> > "imitations of Occultism and Theosophy"
> > 
> > I again invite your atttention to what they
> > wrote which has been posted at:
> > 
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/18249
> 
> 
> An independent observer might see that your attitude to Theosophy 
and 
> its 'original teachings' is becoming increasingly theological, 
> sectarian and crystallized. It seems to replicate, for example, the 
> Church's attitude to the different Gnostics groups in the early 
> Christian era by establishing a definitive and granite-like 
Theology 
> that must be accepted as the only true and real benchmark of the 
> Christian tradition.
> 
> In one of her letters to the American Conventions (April 1888), 
> Madame Blavstky wrote:
> 
> "Orthodoxy in Theosophy is a thing neither possible nor desirable. 
It 
> is diversity of opinion, within certain limits, that keeps the 
> Theosophical Society a living and a healthy body, its many other 
ugly 
> features notwithstanding. Were it not, also, for the existence of a 
> large amount of uncertainty in the minds of students of Theosophy, 
> such healthy divergencies would be impossible, and the Society 
would 
> degenerate into a sect, in which a narrow and stereotyped creed 
would 
> take the place of the living and breathing spirit of Truth and an 
> ever growing Knowledge."
> 
> You may go on with your campaign to denounce the writings of Annie 
> Besant and C. W. Leadbeater as "garbled and distorted versions" of 
> Theosophy, but please don't expect me to be a part of it.
> 
> Personally, I find useful as a guideline in my studies the advice 
> given by St. Paul (and quoted by Madame Blavatsky in "Isis 
Unveiled", 
> vol. II, p. 84): 
> 
> "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." (1 Thess. 5.21)
> 
> 
> Pedro