Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt00437)

In a message dated 3/10/2006 5:00:11 AM Central Standard Time,  
carlosaveline@hotmail.com writes:

Her  libelers as Paul Johnson, Bill Merdith  and others are here but to makes 
 
us awake.



Paul has many virtues, but libeler is not among them.  His work is a  
valuable addition to the study of the period and to the origins of Theosophical  
thought back in the days when Theosophists actually did think.  One may  disagree 
with his conclusions, but not with the quality of the research nor the  
quality of the man.
 
Admittedly he does have a talent for getting people mad at him that I can  
only sit back and envy and no doubt he will write a book on the Hermeticists  
that will have them screaming for his head as well, but that is a sign of  
intellectual honesty, something that we need more of in our world.
 
Blavatsky's work stands on its own.  Much of it is good and useful,  much of 
it is utter nonsense and all of it was written in the context of the  19th ce
ntury.
 
Uncritical worship is unbecoming in a Theosophist.  We are not meant  to be 
worshippers.  We are not religious people.  We are  thinkers.  We are expected 
to examine and question, to accept and and also  to reject as our honest 
examination leads us.  And we will disagree,  vehemently at times.
 
But that is what we are supposed to do.  There is no holy writ in  Theosophy, 
no matter how many times people have attempted to impose it.
 
Blavatsky's greatness was not in spite of her flaws, it was because of them  
and we do her an injustice in attempting to ignore them and present her as  
something that she was not.
 
Paul Johnson has done more for her than all the vituperation thrown at him  
could ever hope to accomplish.
 
Chuck the Heretic



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]