Theos-Talk Archives (September 2004 Message tt00195)

Sept. 6 2004

Dear Katinka / Erica:

Will you be able to help me?


I need original Sources and references please?

I want to verify what you offer.

As an example:  

Earlier, Erica referred me to something on the "Green" Web-site concerning
Judge.

Unfortunately it is at least 3rd or 4th generation hear-say.

I want for accuracy the FIRST generation statement, if available. 

Do you have any such?

Dallas
 
==============================

-----Original Message-----
From: Katinka Hesselink [mailto:mail@katinkahesselink.net] 
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 3:47 AM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Theos-World Re: Anand: Serious Questions with Profound Implications

Blavatsky stated specifically that she would not be speaking to anyone
after she was dead. Nor would Olcott, for that matter.

Katinka
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "adelasie" <adelasie@s...> wrote:
> Dear Erica,
> 
> Is it possible that we don't know enough to make such a 
> determination?
> 
> > The writing style on one of the letter Judge affirms to be from
> > Blavatsky it's a very different from the writing style of Blavatsky.
> 
> Such an accomplished adept as HPB could surely write in more than one 
> style. Also, when a high entity communicates with someone in 
> manifestation, the message comes through the latter, and can be 
> colored by his/her personality in matters of expression.
> 
> > And also how he could affirm to be in contact with the diseased
> > Blavatsky without challenging some of her basic teachings that are so
> > clear against mediums practices. 
> 
> Perhaps HPB's teachings about mediumship did not apply to her own 
> case. She was not a medium, such as those she warned against. She was 
> a high adept, with a crucial work to do for the human race. Judge was 
> her chosen successor, and perhaps there are things possible in the 
> universe that we simply do not understand. Our lack of ability to 
> comprehend does not make them impossible.
> 
> I have no way of determining the validity of Judge's claim, and 
> certainly do not wish to convince anyone of one side of the argument 
> or the other. But it does seem advisable, in the light of the crucial 
> nature of the work of Theosophy for the evolution of humanity, that 
> we at least exercise a bit of tolerance in considering such 
> questions. More may depend upon our conclusions that we could know.
> 
> Adelasie