Questions & Answers to Daniel and Paul
Feb 13, 2006 04:13 AM
by carlosaveline cardoso aveline
DISCIPLESHIP:
ANSWERS AND QUESTIONS TO
DANIEL CALDWELL AND PAUL JOHNSON
Daniel,
Thanks for the opportuniy you provide me by sending us this excerpts of Paul
Johnson's texts.
I was interested in knowing what he thinks about Masters/HPB.
As I take you are interested in provoking discord between Paul and the rest
of us, I understand you made an able selection of those Paul's positions
which are less agreable to my view.
I will consider you copied the paragraphs correctly and comment them below,
most briefly and in an incomplete way.
1) STATEMENT ONE:
HPB told at least four distinct versions of her acquaintance with
the Master she met in her youth in London. . . . With four mutually
contradictory versions of the same character, all that can be
concluded is that most if not all of HPB's stories about him were FALSE.
CCA: Every true disciple has to protect the privacy of the magnetic link
with the Master.
For magnetic reasons. The link is too sensitive to be exposed to the average
mental vibrations. THIS is true. But Paul's conclusion that because a
disciple clouds his relation with his source of inspiration,
then everything he says has to be false -- this is a wrong conclusion to
my view.
Of course, I think theosophists should respect Paul's right to think and
say what he likes about disciples and masters. Besides, he is not creating
false persons to attack the theosophical movement. He is not lying, cheating
or using false names, as long as I know. As I wrote before, the Masters are
NOT interested in millions of people believing too seriously in their
existence (that would be harmful to their work). They must be understood in
their own level of consciousness, not "believed in". So, if Paul
desbelieves of them, he is part of this broad equation of search for the
Truth, and I am glad to discuss this with him as long as he is honest. And
I have no reasons to question his sincerity so far.
STATEMENT TWO:
...much of HPB's portrayal of Morya and Koot Hoomi was designed TO
MISLEAD in order to protect their privacy....
CCA: An exaggeration, I think. The limitation I may see in Paul's work (I
hope he helps us clarify his vision of this) is in his premises. The false
premise is that "everything which cannot be understood through the logical ,
successive and linear brain-hemisphere is then necessarily false". But more
important than this, Daniel, is that YOU must tell us something about your
close friend David Green. Is he but a fraud, a bad trick you are trying to
play on us all? Could you clarify that, please? I am sure you have the
intellectual courage to do that and I am confident you will, thanks.
STATEMENT THREE:
If I can prove to the satisfaction of many scholars that Mme.
Blavatsky FICTIONALIZED her Masters, and that the personae of Morya
and Koot Hoomi are covers for other people, that does not detract
one iota from the truth of the spiritual principles enunciated by
her or the alleged Masters.
CCA:
Paul writes as if HPB was the only source of information about the Masters.
There were dozens of full disciples and lay disciples giving PUBLIC
testimonies about them. Olcott, Judge, Mohini, Laura, Damodar -- dozens.
But a Master is truly at the Buddhic level, 5D not 3D. So as his energy gets
to the personality level of the disciple an outer mental/emotional image of
the Master he is "created" into the personal world of that disciple or lay
disciple. But TRUE discipleship occurs only between the buddhic level of the
disciple's heart and the Masters.
Commentaries, Paul?
Diferent disciples and lay disciples will have most different views of the
same source of inspiration, in their personalities. Discipleship and Masters
are essentially impossible to understand with the help of words only. Words
and reasoning can only provide us with some useful metaphors pointing at the
MYSTERY of true blessing. I ask Paul to think it over, to meditate, and
then comment.
So to accuse HPB of fictionalizing is, itself, a product of an old
FICTION, according to which, that which is not three-dimensional, 3D, does
not exist.
Yet, Paul does NOT to have to think like me for me to respect him. If it
were not for him, I would not have the chance to share my views on
discipleship in out Theos-talk. So honest desbelievers help our common
investigation... AND --- Paul is not using fraud. He is a human being,
hence, he can learn and evolve like anyone of us.
STATEMENT FOUR:
In 1880, the Mahatmas' letters were full of geographical references
to Punjab and Kashmir. But in the next few years, a cover story
about their residence in a Tibetan ashram was promoted and a number
of FALSE testimonies concocted [by HPB?] as a diversionary
tactic. . . .
CCA: Again, either Paul is the great disciple who knows everything about
what is true and false
with regard to the Masters, or then he cannot have this information, since
everybody knows that
only secrecy can protect the true sdpiritual work from TROLLERS, from
persecutors, from Vatican paid secret agents, from liars, from libellers,
etc. Every mystic since humanity exist had and has to use secrecy ( not
lies) as to inner links and also an open dialogue and on the art of living,
on discipleship in general, etc. Sincerity is of the essence.
Now, since it seems Paul is not in good terms with any Vatican-paid secret
agents, he is NOT in the broad category of Solovyofs, Coulombs, etc., and so
on.
Desbelievers always deserved, and they had, ALL and DEEP respect from
Masters, Disciples and Lay Disciples. EVER.
We have to protect the right of people to disbelief and to doubt because --
and this is a KEY! -- Those Who FREELY Doubt Today Will Freely SEE The
Truth By Themselves Tomorrow. No constraint should be used by us, then,
against Paul Johnson or anyone who doubts Masters and HPB honestly.
Should we make a critical examination of Paul's work? Yes. Let's see,
then.
Is he being honest? Is he inventing false personae to atack the movement?
Is he divulging proven Libels as if they were part of the theosophical
literature? No, Daniel. No. Or would you tell us that Paul is a deceiver,
using false names to attack any theosophical groups? Will you kindly
answer, my respected Daniel?
I guess the rest of Daniel's message is less relevant by now. I fraternally
and respectfully ask Paul's comments on this, above. But I also do ask Paul
two other questions:
1) How would you, Paul, interpret Daniel's silence on his possible fraud by
creating a false "theosophist", named "Mr. David Green"?
2) Have, in your view, Daniel commited other frauds, creating other false
persons? Does he have any false personality who specializes in attacking
other persons and authors? Did he created a variety of David Green, another
personality involving in criticizing your own work, Paul?
Peace to all beings and thanks to you all, friends in the Theos-net. May
we seek for Truth in
Peace and accept and confront the inevitable challenges while we keep peace
in our minds!
Best regards, Carlos Cardoso Aveline.
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
From: "danielhcaldwell" <danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Theos-World To Carlos Aveline: You may believe anything or
everything Paul Johnson has....
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 06:25:52 -0000
To Mr. Carlos Aveline:
You may believe anything or everything Mr. Johnson has
written or stated.
For example maybe you are now even having second thoughts and are
ready to accept and believe the following statements which Mr.
Johnson has written, had published and promoted:
STATEMENT ONE:
HPB told at least four distinct versions of her acquaintance with
the Master she met in her youth in London. . . . With four mutually
contradictory versions of the same character, all that can be
concluded is that most if not all of HPB's stories about him were
FALSE.
STATEMENT TWO:
...much of HPB's portrayal of Morya and Koot Hoomi was designed TO
MISLEAD in order to protect their privacy....
STATEMENT THREE:
If I can prove to the satisfaction of many scholars that Mme.
Blavatsky FICTIONALIZED her Masters, and that the personae of Morya
and Koot Hoomi are covers for other people, that does not detract
one iota from the truth of the spiritual principles enunciated by
her or the alleged Masters.
STATEMENT FOUR:
In 1880, the Mahatmas' letters were full of geographical references
to Punjab and Kashmir. But in the next few years, a cover story
about their residence in a Tibetan ashram was promoted and a number
of FALSE testimonies concocted [by HPB?] as a diversionary
tactic. . . .
CAPS ADDED IN THE ABOVE STATEMENTS.
In light of these four statements, how does Mr. Johnson view the
following written by H.P. Blavatsky and Master Koot Hoomi?
In a letter to A.P. Sinnett (dated Oct. 9, 1882), H.P.B. recounts
her visit with Masters K.H and M. in Sikkim:
"Oh the blessed blessed two days! It was like the old times....The
same kind of wooden hut, a box divided into three compartments for
rooms, and standing in a jungle on four pelican's legs....the same
eternal `gul-gul-gul' sound of my Boss's [Morya's] inextinguishable
chelum pipe; the old familiar sweet voice of your KH (whose voice is
still sweeter and face still thinner and more transparent)....."
(The Letters Of H.P. Blavatsky To A.P. Sinnett, 1925, p. 38)
In a letter to Sinnett (received Oct., 1882), Master K.H. himself
describes this same visit:
"I do not believe I was ever so profoundly touched by anything I
witnessed in all my life, as I was with the poor old creature's
[HPB's] ecstatic rapture, when meeting us recently both in our
natural [physical] bodies...Even our phlegmatic M[orya] was thrown
off his balance, by such an exhibition---of which he was chief hero.
He had to use his power, and plunge her into a profound sleep,
otherwise she would have burst some blood-vessel....in her delirious
attempts to flatten her nose against his riding mantle besmeared
with the Sikkim mud!...." (The Mahatma Letters, Letter No. 92 in the
new chronological edition; Letter No. 54 in the 2nd, and 3rd
editions.)
According to Johnson's views of "cover-up" and "disinformation," it
would appear H.P.B.'s visit with these two Masters in Sikkim never
happened.
In other words, Mr. Johnson is claiming and promoting the idea that
Blavatsky and "Koot Hoomi" were lying to Sinnett when they wrote the
above letters.
Yahoo! Groups Links
_________________________________________________________________
Copa 2006: Sabe como se diz ‘pênalti’ em alemão? Clique aqui!
http://copa.br.msn.com/extra/dicionario/l-z/
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
