Brigitte Muehlegger on Rawson and my comments
Dec 20, 2004 10:56 AM
by Daniel H. Caldwell
You [Brigitte Muehlegger] also wrote:
"I therefore don't think Rawson's testimony
about Blavatsky should be dismissed, he is certainly
one of the few people that know of the
more intimate aspects of Blavatsky's life. And
his aquintance with Blavatsky goes further back
then that of Olcott and Blavatsky."
I agree that we should not hastily dismiss
Rawson's testimony but we should not try to
read into his testimony more than what is there
stated. For example, what is the SPECIFIC
evidence that supports your statement that
Rawson "is certainly one of the few people that
know of the more intimate aspects of Balvatsky's
life." For what period of time did Rawson know
Blavatsky? Did Rawson actually know
more about the intimate aspects of HPB's life than
Olcott or Wachtmeister did? And if you say "Yes",
how do you know that is a true statement?
For example, Paul Johnson says Rawson was a life long friend of
Blavatsky, but where is the evidence to support that generalization?
How much contact was there between Blavatsky and Rawson in the time
period 1879 through 1891, for example? Before Blavatsky came to
America in 1873, how much contact had she had with Rawson? Did
Rawson have more contact in America with Blavatsky than Olcott or
Wilder or Judge? What we need here is evidence that answers these
questions, not just speculation paraded as factual statements.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application