"Isis", SD and the Pseudo-Scholars
Mar 15, 2006 05:27 AM
by carlosaveline cardoso aveline
Dear friends,
Below, when asked:
"Has any scholar of theosophy discovered a "lie" within the works given to
the world, i.e. Isis and SD?"
Jerry says this vague thing:
"There is a lot of controversy about the accuracy and source of HPB's
information. That is to be expected."
And he naturally does not mention one single point.
I see Jerry's way of thinking is indeed very similar to that of P. Johnson,
Katinka Hesserlink, John Algeo and other similar "researchers".
Carlos.
From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins <jjhe@charter.net>
Reply-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World To Jerry, on Pseudo Scholars
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 16:39:31 -0800
Dear Cass,
>Let us say, for argument's sake, that HPB, had reasons unknown to us, but
obviously affirmed by the Masters, to preserve their identity and
whereabouts as "persona non gratis",while at the same time needing to
acknowledge that the universal wisdom was directed and dictated by those
same beings. What a task for anyone!
>
>
That appears to be just the case, in my opinion.
>Has any scholar of theosophy discovered a "lie" within the works given to
the world, i.e. Isis and SD?
>
>
There is a lot of controversy about the accuracy and source of HPB's
information. That is to be expected.
>Isn't this the cogent point?
>
Why?
>AS far as the bun fight over Tacoma etc, my humble and non scholastic
attitude is that the Poparisation of the TS is continuing and will polarise
the society out of credible existence, as is the case in the rise and fall
of the catholic church.
>
The way I like to express it is that the Theosophical Organizations are
bound hand and foot by their own karma. I see the polarization as the
outcome of that karma.
Best,
Jerry
Cass Silva wrote:
>Let us say, for argument's sake, that HPB, had reasons unknown to us, but
obviously affirmed by the Masters, to preserve their identity and
whereabouts as "persona non gratis", while at the same time needing to
acknowledge that the universal wisdom was directed and dictated by those
same beings. What a task for anyone!
>
>Has any scholar of theosophy discovered a "lie" within the works given to
the world, i.e. Isis and SD?
>
>Isn't this the cogent point?
>
>AS far as the bun fight over Tacoma etc, my humble and non scholastic
attitude is that the Poparisation of the TS is continuing and will polarise
the society out of credible existence, as is the case in the rise and fall
of the catholic church.
>
>No matter, the horse has already bolted, and the rider free at last from
all the petty struggles brought about my men who may believe their crusade
is based on moral integrity, laughable.
>
>Christianity has been arguing for 2000 years about its claim as the one
true religion, so those in what they consider powerful positions will be
kept employed for many years to come, kicking up the dust.
>
>
>Cass
>
>carlosaveline cardoso aveline <carlosaveline@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Jerry,
>
>Thanks for you interesting posting.
>
>You say:
>
>"I expected in your reply below to either supply quotes where Paul did
>indeed make such statements, and/or to comment upon my discourse.
Instead,
>you come up with a quote where
>Paul uses the word "charlatans" in connection to HPB and Gurdjieff. Now,
>liar and charlatan are two very different words with different meanings."
>
>I say:
>
>My point, Jerry, is that Paul Johnson says that HPB lies or is a
charlatan.
>The two words are applied to false persons. If you believe charlatans do
>not lie, well, my friend! It sounds like that difference between
"innocent"
>and "not guilty". (By the way, Brazilian tribunals use the word
"innocent"
>instead of "not guilty").
>
>The issue is that Paul says, implies and suggests that HPB was not
truthful
>or reliable. We may all use the words we prefer for that. There are
plenty
>of them. The meaning is the same, though.
>
>Besides, my point is NOT that Paul openly and firmly states HPB is a
fraud.
>He follows Algeo's line. He suggests this is "a possibility among
others".
>
>This kind of action is one of the most efficient forms of active
slander.
>This is a form of slander in which the slander tries to avoid being
caught
>as such. This has been used in Adyar TS since the false accusations
>against Judge in the 1890s.
>
>When asked to clarify his position with regard to HPB's honesty (which
>should be no big deal!), Paul, the Historian, refuses to to so, and
gets
>away from the debate, using the mask of a person with offended
>sensitivities.
>
>Is this emotionalistic show a "scholarly attitude"? Not at all.
>
>It is well-known, Jerry, that authentic scholars and researchers do NOT
>get away when their thesis are confronted.
>
>Just the opposite. They take every opportunity to clarify their facts,
to
>defend and to IMPROVE their viewpoints.
>
>Only historians who are benefitting from authoritarian political
structures
>will get nervous and bitter and reject clarifying their views. Now,
Adyar
>TS structure, as you may know, is not too open-minded...
>
>So this is the kind of "Historian" some Adyar leaders (not Ms. Radha
>Burnier) need, in order to avoid facing the consequences of
Leadbeater's
>biography written by Gregory Tillett -- and other publications which show
>20th century pseudo-theosophy as it is.
>
>Radha Burnier runs an authoritarian structure, to my view -- yes.
>
>But she clearly disapproves the gossiping/libeling policy about HPB,
and
>she will never -- as long as I know -- defend CW Leadbeater's
clairvoyance
>and fancies. I hope you understand I am looking at the context, in
order
>to understand the specific facts.
>
>I am sorry if I did not discuss every point in your message below. I hope
I
>addressed the main issues, though. Let me know if I did not.
>
>Thank you very much for your openess of mind.
>
>
>Best regards, Carlos.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins
>>Reply-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
>>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
>>Subject: Theos-World To Carlos Cardoso Aveline--some thoughts and a
reply
>>Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 02:01:10 -0800
>>
>>Dear Carlos,
>>
>>I changed your subject heading out of respect for Paul, who has stated
>>on several occasions that he does not like his name displayed in subject
>>headings. It is just a matter of respecting the preferences of
>>others. I replaced the heading with your name, which, of course, you
>>are free and welcome to change.
>>
>>Because of my busy schedule, I have become more selective concerning
>>which postings I read and which I reply to. I try to reply to those
>>posts which I feel that I can make a constructive contribution to the
>>writer and/or interested readers. To properly do this, I have to take
>>the time to read (sometimes several times) the post, consider what they
>>are saying (and implying), and then formulate an answer which I hope
>>will move the topic along. This takes time. But I believe that these
>>kind of posts raises the overall quality of a discussion board and is
>>helpful to others. On the other hand, to argue for the sake of argument
>>is, for me, a waste of energy and time. It is my hope that my
>>correspondents take the same time and consideration to reply to my
>>messages to them. Now, regarding our discussion.
>>
>>My last response to you was concerning your statement that Paul wrote
>>that HPB "lied." Here again is the statement you made, which I replied:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>When Paul Johnson writes that she lied, or implies that she lied, that
>>>>
>>>>
>>she was a Spy, etc. (which she denied vehemently and unendingly) he is
>>saying that her philosophy is the philosophy of a liar, the philosophy
of a
>>
>>
>>>>fraudulent woman.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>I replied that I did not recall Paul writing that HPB lied. I then went
>>into a carefully considered discourse about HPB's style of communication
>>and how it is so often misunderstood. I expected in your reply below to
>>either supply quotes where Paul did indeed make such statements, and/or
>>to comment upon my discourse. Instead, you come up with a quote where
>>Paul uses the word "charlatans" in connection to HPB and Gurdjieff.
>>Now, liar and charlatan are two very different words with different
>>meanings. My Webster's Dictionary defines the word in part: "one who
>>prates much in his own favor, and makes unwarranted pretensions..."
>>This definition seems to fit well the quote you gave me below. It does
>>not necessarily imply lying, but only self-promotion. At any rate, this
>>is an entirely different discussion. If this is your method of
>>discussion, that is, shifting the terms of the discussion with new
>>arguments instead of responding to my discourse, then I must reply by
>>saying that I frankly cannot afford the time, nor do I have an
>>inclination to play this kind of game. With this said, I will assume
>>that you misunderstood and will more carefully re-read my last. In the
>>mean time, I will respond to your statements below:
>>
>>I re-read the 1987 Theosophical History Pamphlet and noted the quotes
>>given below. Your sentence fragment "had fraudulent aspects" Appears
>>once on page three. In context, the quote reads:
>>
>>"The Sufi doctrine of instrumental teaching demonstrates a possible
>>explanation of the apparently 'outrageous' and 'fraudulent" aspects of
>>H.P.B. and Gurdjieff." He then goes on to explain what the Sufi doctrine
>>of instrumental teaching is. Note that Paul had put "outrageous" and
>>"fraudulent" in quotes. That means that he is quoting someone elses'
>>use of the terms. Also, the qualifier "apparently" indicates that
>>whoever he is quoting, is not saying that aspects of H.P.B.'s and
>>Gurdjieff's methods appear to be fraudulent. Also, the main sense of
>>the paragraph, if you read it in its entirety, is to explain the
>>doctrine of instrumental teaching, which Paul is suggesting that H.P.B.
>>and Gurdjieff may have employed. If they did, then that would mean that
>>what appears to be outrageous and fraudulent is not so after all.
>>
>>
>>The quote you cite on page seven is part of Paul's concluding
>>paragraphs. Here, he is naming several possible conclusions one can
>>make about H.P.B. and Gurdjieff. To paraphrase the ideas: 1) that Both
>>may have been Charlatans with Gurdjieff exploiting what HPB
>>accomplished. 2) That H.P.B. was genuine and Gurdjieff not. 3) That
>>Gurdjieff was sent to correct mistakes H.P.B. made 4) Both H.P.B. and
>>Gurdjieff were genuine. Paul does not, in his conclusion offer an
>>opinion as to which, if any of those possibilities are correct.
>>
>>
>>
>>>2) Besides, I friendly challenge you to extract from Johnson any clear
>>>declaration that he does NOT consider HPB a fraud, and that he
considers
>>>
>>>
>>her
>>
>>
>>>as a sincere, honest, decent woman, author and teacher. He uses the
same
>>>"maybe" tactics as Algeo and others, in the way he slanders HPB. All
his
>>>books use that strategy. As he wants to sell his books, he will most
>>>
>>>
>>likely
>>
>>
>>>NOT contradict himself in that. (In his "approach", Paul ignores the
1986
>>>declaration of the SPR, etc.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Carlos, you have to keep in mind that this article was submitted as a
>>scholarly paper. What you want Paul to write is an Hagiography or an
>>Apologia. Those kinds of discourse are not suitable for scholarly
>>writing. I can say that I have known Paul since 1984 and know for a
>>fact that he does indeed admire HPB.
>>
>>
>>
>>>3) Of course, Esoteric Philosophy cannot be understood at the level of
>>>
>>>
>>outer
>>
>>
>>>appearances ("face value"). True. Esoteric Philosophy deals with the
>>>occult, or essential aspects of life, which are "invisible to the eyes"
>>>
>>>
>>(to
>>
>>
>>>use St. Exupery's expression). Yet they are invisible NOT because they
>>>
>>>
>>are
>>
>>
>>>false, as illustrated-ignorants like Paul Johnson and John Algeo will
>>>
>>>
>>say.
>>
>>
>>I think that we all are ignorant at different levels. Yet for one
>>person to call another ignorant, reeks of arrogance to my nose.
>>
>>
>>
>>>See the 'Doctrine
>>>of the Eye' versus the 'Doctrine of the Heart' in "The Voice of the
>>>Silence".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>I have been studying HPB's writings for 43 years and teaching them for
>>almost thirty years. I think I understand to eye and heart doctrines
>>well enough.
>>
>>
>>
>>>g a4) As to HPB bein fraud or semi-fraud, it is enough to see her
astral
>>>chart. She was a Leo in the sun sign. Is Leo a sign for fraud or lies?
>>>
>>>
>>No.
>>
>>
>>Benito Mussolini was born July 29, 18883. That makes him a Leo too.
>>What do you think of him?
>>
>>
>>
>>>directly opposite to the sometimes
>>>unstable, anxious and astute Scorpio (while Scorpio as a sign also has
>>>
>>>
>>very
>>
>>
>>>good qualities, of course).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Actually, Leo is opposite Aquarius.
>>
>>
>>
>>>HPB was Cancer in her ascendant -- a
>>>personality strongly emotional, sincere, loving, direct, sensitive,
open,
>>>compassionate, sometimes too vulnerable -- and uncapable of deceiving.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Yasser Arafat had cancer rising. He didn't seem to be overly sensitive
>>about the people he killed to get to the position he was in.
>>
>>
>>
>>>Her Moon was in Libra -- her emotions were transparent,
>>>rational, inclined to justice and reciprocity, also vulnerable, and
far
>>>
>>>
>>>from allowing her to have any cold outer mask.
>>
>>
>>Truman Capote had moon in Libra. He wrote "In Cold Blood."
>>
>>
>>
>>>Those who attack her personal,
>>>Lion/Cancer/Libra honesty and openess, are attacking the essential
>>>
>>>
>>ethical
>>
>>
>>>basis of her philosophy.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Mere planetary placements alone are not going to tell you much about a
>>person. I suggest that you leave astrology to the astrologers.
>>
>>
>>
>>>5) I cannot agree that the book "Incidents in the Life of Madame
>>>
>>>
>>Blavatsky",
>>
>>
>>>by A. P. Sinnett, is a "confused mess". In fact, it is a major source
of
>>>first-hand evidence on HPB's life.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Actually, second hand evidence. It is a biography.
>>
>>
>>
>>>It is the cause of many of HPB's letters
>>>now available. Because of this, Vera, HPB's sister, wrote important
>>>
>>>
>>texts
>>
>>
>>>about the life of the founder of the theosophical movement.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Boris de Zirkoff deserves credit for pulling together most of the
>>letters we have. He also corrected the many mistakes in the Biography.
>>See the chronologies in the Blavatsky Collected Works, which he spent 50
>>years compiling.
>>
>>
>>
>>>6) As to the absence of data about HPB's life, there are two points I
>>>
>>>
>>want
>>
>>
>>>to make.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>I don't wish to get into a discussion about your notions of the
>>esotericism of St. Germain, Carlos Castaneda etc. Rather, HPB simply
>>stated that her private life before she became a public person is none
>>of the public's business. Most public people fell that way, whether
>>they are an occultist, actor, or astronaut.
>>
>>
>>
>>>7) Up to a few days ago, I thought Johnson to be honestly self-deluded.
>>>
>>>
>>I
>>
>>
>>>have to apologize for that. I have learned better. Paul makes brutal
>>>
>>>
>>though
>>
>>
>>>disguised attacks to HPB and the Masters, but, when confronted with
the
>>>facts, he tries to cover himself with the false mantle and role of a
>>>
>>>
>>poor,
>>
>>
>>>delicate and innocent victim.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>I hope that the misreadings I have pointed out to you will help you to
>>put aside your former conclusions, carefully re-read Paul's writings and
>>re-evaluate them.
>>
>>Best wishes,
>>Jerry
>>
>>
>>carlosaveline cardoso aveline wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Dear Jerry,
>>>
>>>Thanks for your views.
>>>
>>>1) I will quote from Paul Johnson's pamplhlet "Madame Blavatsky, the
>>>
>>>
>>'veiled
>>
>>
>>>years' " (THC, London, 1987, p. 07):
>>>
>>>"There are two obvious questions(...) The first concerns the relative
>>>genuiness of Gurdjieff and Blavatsky as emissaries of occult orders.
>>>
>>>
>>Both
>>
>>
>>>may have been charlatans, with Gurdjieff merely exploiting the market
>>>created by H.P.B. (...)."
>>>
>>>Is that clear?
>>>
>>>In page 03 of the same pamphlet, Johnson explains "why" HPB was a
fraud,
>>>
>>>
>>or
>>
>>
>>>"had fraudulent aspects" in her behaviour and work. HPB is but a mirror
>>>
>>>
>>for
>>
>>
>>>him as for many people.
>>>
>>>
>>>2) Besides, I friendly challenge you to extract from Johnson any clear
>>>declaration that he does NOT consider HPB a fraud, and that he
considers
>>>
>>>
>>her
>>
>>
>>>as a sincere, honest, decent woman, author and teacher. He uses the
same
>>>"maybe" tactics as Algeo and others, in the way he slanders HPB. All
his
>>>books use that strategy. As he wants to sell his books, he will most
>>>
>>>
>>likely
>>
>>
>>>NOT contradict himself in that. (In his "approach", Paul ignores the
1986
>>>declaration of the SPR, etc.)
>>>
>>>3) Of course, Esoteric Philosophy cannot be understood at the level of
>>>
>>>
>>outer
>>
>>
>>>appearances ("face value"). True. Esoteric Philosophy deals with the
>>>occult, or essential aspects of life, which are "invisible to the eyes"
>>>
>>>
>>(to
>>
>>
>>>use St. Exupery's expression). Yet they are invisible NOT because they
>>>
>>>
>>are
>>
>>
>>>false, as illustrated-ignorants like Paul Johnson and John Algeo will
>>>
>>>
>>say.
>>
>>
>>>Essential aspects of life can be seen only by the heart. See the
>>>
>>>
>>'Doctrine
>>
>>
>>>of the Eye' versus the 'Doctrine of the Heart' in "The Voice of the
>>>Silence".
>>>
>>>g a4) As to HPB bein fraud or semi-fraud, it is enough to see her
astral
>>>chart. She was a Leo in the sun sign. Is Leo a sign for fraud or lies?
>>>
>>>
>>No.
>>
>>
>>>It is the most brave and loyal sign, directly opposite to the
sometimes
>>>unstable, anxious and astute Scorpio (while Scorpio as a sign also has
>>>
>>>
>>very
>>
>>
>>>good qualities, of course). HPB was Cancer in her ascendant -- a
>>>personality strongly emotional, sincere, loving, direct, sensitive,
open,
>>>compassionate, sometimes too vulnerable -- and uncapable of deceiving.
>>>
>>>
>>No
>>
>>
>>>frauds, then. Her Moon was in Libra -- her emotions were transparent,
>>>rational, inclined to justice and reciprocity, also vulnerable, and
far
>>>
>>>
>>>from allowing her to have any cold outer mask. And -- she spent most
of
>>her
>>
>>
>>>life fighting cold outer personality masks, which she called "shells'.
>>>
>>>
>>She
>>
>>
>>>had reasons to do so. All of her philosophy is the philosophy of
>>>
>>>
>>universal
>>
>>
>>>truth and personal sincerity. Those who attack her personal,
>>>Lion/Cancer/Libra honesty and openess, are attacking the essential
>>>
>>>
>>ethical
>>
>>
>>>basis of her philosophy.
>>>
>>>
>>>5) I cannot agree that the book "Incidents in the Life of Madame
>>>
>>>
>>Blavatsky",
>>
>>
>>>by A. P. Sinnett, is a "confused mess". In fact, it is a major source
of
>>>first-hand evidence on HPB's life. It is the cause of many of HPB's
>>>
>>>
>>letters
>>
>>
>>>now available. Because of this, Vera, HPB's sister, wrote important
>>>
>>>
>>texts
>>
>>
>>>about the life of the founder of the theosophical movement.
>>>
>>>
>>>6) As to the absence of data about HPB's life, there are two points I
>>>
>>>
>>want
>>
>>
>>>to make.
>>>
>>>First, the life of every regular disciple will have mysterious aspects.
>>>
>>>
>>They
>>
>>
>>>have to protect all their inner lives from "outward magnetism". See
>>>Alessandro Cagliostro, Count of St. Germain and others, equally
>>>
>>>
>>mysterious,
>>
>>
>>>and equally called "charlatans" by the Paul-Johnsons and V. Solovyofs
of
>>>their times. The libellers of Initiates enjoy selling books with their
>>>fancied "revelations".
>>>
>>>Second, HPB, as Carlos Castaneda and other learners, trained herself
for
>>>some time in self-forgetfulness, which includes "erasing the signs of
>>>
>>>
>>every
>>
>>
>>>step taken in the world". This is something
>>>which people who do not understand a iota of esoteric philosophy cannot
>>>
>>>
>>ever
>>
>>
>>>understand.
>>>
>>>
>>>7) Up to a few days ago, I thought Johnson to be honestly self-deluded.
>>>
>>>
>>I
>>
>>
>>>have to apologize for that. I have learned better. Paul makes brutal
>>>
>>>
>>though
>>
>>
>>>disguised attacks to HPB and the Masters, but, when confronted with
the
>>>facts, he tries to cover himself with the false mantle and role of a
>>>
>>>
>>poor,
>>
>>
>>>delicate and innocent victim.
>>>
>>>As we have a rather long history of disguised and ambiguous attacks
>>>
>>>
>>against
>>
>>
>>>HPB, this is not initially easy to identify. But time will help truth
as
>>>
>>>
>>it
>>
>>
>>>always does, in this aspect as in many others.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins
>>>>Reply-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
>>>>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
>>>>Subject: Re: Theos-World Jerry: Teachers & Teaching
>>>>Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 18:30:13 -0800
>>>>
>>>>Dear Carlos,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>When Paul Johnson writes that she lied, or implies that she lied,
that
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>she
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>was a Spy, etc. (which she denied vehemently and unendingly) he is
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>saying
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>that her philosophy is the philosophy of a liar, the philosophy of a
>>>>>fraudulent woman.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I don't recall Paul writing that HPB "lied", though I am aware that in
>>>>TMR he was careful about taking anything HPB writes at face value.
>>>>Based upon my own study of HPB, I would have to agree with him on this
>>>>point. For instance, HPB's series, From the Caves and Jungles of
>>>>Hindostan, is a mixture of real events and artistic elaboration. Yet,
I
>>>>know of more than one person who has mistakenly taken this work to be
an
>>>>historical account. I believe that it never was intended to be so.
>>>>Rather, it is an artistic work which also contains a lot of veiled
>>>>teachings. So, the point rests upon what one qualifies to be a lie. To
>>>>take a more general instance, an autobiography as literature is
>>>>generally thought of as nonfiction. Yet, can we really expect people
to
>>>>write about themselves without being selective and biased concerning
>>>>events and personal experiences? Does that selectivity and biases make
>>>>such writers liars? Like most everyone else, HPB preferred that the
>>>>personal details of her life remain private. Sinnett found this out
when
>>>>he tried to write her Biography. HPB did not want him to write it, but
>>>>he pressured her until she gave in enough to answer his questions. The
>>>>resulting book was a confused mess because she also did not go out of
>>>>her way to make sure that what Sinnett wrote was accurate. Did that
make
>>>>her a liar?
>>>>
>>>>As for her philosophy, HPB warned her readers that her teachings had
to
>>>>be read with a healthy dose of metaphor. In the SD, she points out to
>>>>her readers the ridiculous mess many students made out of the globes
and
>>>>rounds teachings because of their over literalism. In his writings,
>>>>W.B. Yeats, one of HPB's students, recalled another student telling
him
>>>>that HPB told him there is another globe attached to this one at the
>>>>north pole. Yeats, who I believe, understood HPB more deeply than
most
>>>>of her students replied, "Oh she must be referring to some myth." The
>>>>student replied, "Oh no. If it wasn't true, then HPB wouldn't have
said
>>>>it." The student, of course, completely missed Yeats' point. When it
>>>>come to spiritual truths, mythology (mythos) communicates deeper
truths
>>>>than literal accounts (logos) could ever do. HPB alludes to this point
>>>>over and over again, yet so many students of Theosophy completely miss
>>>>it. Was Homer a liar when he wrote the Odyssey? If Homer was a liar,
>>>>then so was HPB.
>>>>
>>>>Best
>>>>Jerry
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>carlosaveline cardoso aveline wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Dear Jerry,
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks, brother.
>>>>>
>>>>>Theosophy is about Truth, as you know.
>>>>>
>>>>>The motto of the theosophical movement is about Truth, as we know.
>>>>>
>>>>>HPB wrote many times that Ethics and Truthfulness are of the essence
in
>>>>>Theosophy.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
>=== message truncated ===
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Yahoo! Mail
>Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
_________________________________________________________________
Facilite sua vida: Use o Windows Desktop Search e encontre qualquer arquivo
ou e-mail em seu PC. Acesse: http://desktop.msn.com.br
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
