Theos-Talk Archives (February 2005 Message tt00557)

Dear Paul,

Sunday, February 20, 2005, 5:41:06 PM, kpauljohnson wrote:

> First, a suggestion: if you are addressing a particular listmember it
> might be best to copy it to that person.

Sorry, I don't get your point. What do you mean by "copy it to that
person"? May I see an example? And is your name or nickname in the
"To" field not enough to discern what concerns you?


> "Assert" somehow seems too aggressive but is not as bad as the 
> term "claim" that really hostile Theosophists use as the verb. The 
> truth from my POV is that I *conclude* from evidence that is 
> presented with an invitation to others to draw *their own 
> conclusions.*

Apparently their conclusions differ significantly from yours, that's
why your statements are not much welcome by them.


> But your questions wasn't about lying about them only, it was about
> lying about *their nature.*

The word "nature" bears quite a broad sense, AFAIK. I meant their
various characteristics (including names, ranks, ages, etc.) versus
the very fact of their existence.


> Yes, she lied about their names and other details

This is a strong assertion (if not a claim) and I would like to see
some evidence. Sorry, I'm too lazy to dig through your voluminous
books in search of such, especially if they are offline. :-) Could you
please drop here a precise quotation showing how she lied? I suppose
by the word "lie" you mean that she stated one thing about them while
in reality it was another thing.


> If "of course not" isn't a simple, final no I don't know what is. NO.
> I am not now trying to prove anything.

Okay, okay. Summing up all the above it seems to me that you simply
assert without bothering to prove.


> Many or most of the characteristics attributed to various Masters in
> HPB's writings can be traced to real individuals she knew and was 
> influenced by, but that being sworn to conceal their identities she 
> threw in enough blinds to protect their privacy. 

Your critics, as far as I understand them, assert that this hypothesis
of yours is baseless. But certainly you can hypothesize whatever you
deem fit, although "can be" does not equal "is" and can hardly support
any assertion.


Vladimir