Daniel the Sphinx?
Apr 18, 2006 01:04 PM
by carlosaveline
Dear Friends,
I must send my apologies to Daniel.
I have been paying scarce attention to HPB's slanderers and, for some reason, I also have not payed too much attention to Daniel's websites.
I did not know Daniel enjoyed Tillett's book on Leadbeater.
Now, since Tillett shows and demontrates in his book that Leadbeater was, let's say, a scoundrel and a criminal who abused children, why then does Daniel Caldwell still make propaganda of that kind of pseudo-clairvoyant?
There must be a reason. Most Adyar members do not know, or are taught not to think about Leadbeater's crimes or scandals. But WHY would someone who admires Tillett's book still make propaganda about Leadbeater?
For instance, Mrs. Radha Burnier, a decent person, makes absolutely no propaganda of Leadbeater or of his books. And she is the president of the Adyar TS.
Why then does Daniel make propaganda both of Leadbeater's books and of Tillett's disgusting, but well-documented book "The Elder Brother", which describes CWL as a scoundrel and a criminal?
I am trying to understand Daniel's political agenda.
1) It is not likely that he is with the Vatican and that his aim is to disrupt or cause harm to the theosophical movement as a whole.
2) He is clearly not with the Adyar leaders, meaning Radha Burnier or the members of the Adyar Esoteric School, since it is not their policy to make slanders against HPB -- or embarassing facts about Leadbeater -- circulate.
3) Daniel might have an alliance with John Algeo's interests, which have much in common with the Liberal Catholic Church and other ritualisms inside the Adyar TS. That would explain his attacks attacks to HPB, etc.
4) As to his attacks to Paul Johnson, they could be explained by the fact that they started after John Algeo ceased to have an ambiguous position with regard to Johnson and got distant from him.
5) Now, if it is true that Daniel promotes at the same time Leadbeater's books and Gregory Tillett's biography of Leadbeater, then what is Daniel's agenda?
I do not know.
It does not seem likely that he may be sponsored by Joseph Ratzinger.
Yet one thing seems to be clear to me so far : compared with Walter Carrithers, Jr., Daniel is going rigth the opposite direction.
Walter Carrithers defended the truth and HPB -- as long as I know.
Whereas Daniel is testing the ability of the movement to defend itself.
I don't know will have to think it over.
I will be thankful for any help in this attempt to understand things. Contributions and ideas may be sent to Theos-talk or to my personal e-mail.
Perhaps Daniel himself will help us in that.
Best regards, Carlos.
De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Cópia:
Data:Tue, 18 Apr 2006 19:25:22 -0000
Assunto:Theos-World Re: Daniel Versus Walter Carrithers?
> Carlos,
>
> I must say I enjoy reading your "take" on things.
>
> I sometimes am amazed at some of your conclusions.
> I don't have a clue as to how you come to some of these
> conclusions.
>
> To almost everything you write in the posting below
> I would have to disagree with. To clarify each item
> would take far too much time for me with all my
> projects.
>
> But I will take just one of your "gems":
>
> You say:
>
> =========================================================
> The one who does not talk about Gregory Tillett's important
> biography of C. W. Leadbeater is Daniel Caldwell.
> ========================================================
>
> I believe over the years on the various theosophical discussion
> groups on the internet I have more than once mentioned and
> recommended Gregory Tillett's wonderful book!
>
> It is my opinion that every theosophist in the whole world
> should read Tillett's biography.
>
> I have been hoping for years and even encouraging Ernest Pelletier
> to publish Tillett's lengthy dissertation on Leadbeater.
>
> I remember several years ago calling Ernest and asking when he was
> going to publish it and he said that he (Edmonton TS) was missing
> one page of the dissertation. I then emailed Tillett and told him
> that info and gave Tillett Ernest's email address. I don't know if
> Ernest ever got the missing page but I do hope ETS will publish this
> dissertation. I assume Gregory would not object to that.
>
> Anyway notice I do mention this Leadbeater biography on my website
> and even feature it on my webpage devoted to Mr. Leadbeater:
>
> See:
>
> http://leadbeater.info/
>
> especially
>
> http://blavatskyarchives.com/leadbeaterbib.htm#Life
>
> where I even provided a photo of the cover and a link
> to the ordering info for the book. [I see now that
> that link doesn't work and I will fix it....]
>
> But I ask you a related question Carlos,
>
> would you be so happy with Dr. Tillett IF he wrote
> a biography of HPB? I remember one time after Gregory
> Tillett had visited the United States that Grace Knoche said she
> had wondered if he even believed in the Mahatmas. I don't remember
> if she said she actually up front asked him that question!! Maybe
> she did.
>
> For all I know Gregory may believe the testimony of Coulomb and
> Hodgson. I'm not saying that he does; but I don't actually know
> what his "take" on that testimony is. Maybe he will read this and
> might decide to let us know. Would be interesting....
>
> As to the "true facts" you call them about Leadbeater and Wedgwood,
> readers can see something about that on my website in the Margaret
> Thomas book:
>
> http://blavatskyarchives.com/ton2.pdf
>
> You also write:
>
> that the "SPR did abandon all its charges of fraud against H.P.B."
>
> Is this true? Can you cite the official SPR document in which this
> is stated? I believe Bart on this very forum disputed this
> statement of yours when you wrote something similar several months
> ago.
>
> No more time for now.
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "carlosaveline"
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Friends,
> >
> > Daniel is wrong this time.
> >
> > It is obvious that any sound historical research should establish
> whether documents are authentic of fake.
> >
> > Once it is established documents are fake, there is no reason to
> keep thinking of them night and day. One should leave them aside and
> go ahead.
> >
> > Instead of doing this, Daniel is trying to un-do Carrithers work.
> >
> > Carrithers had the stomach to go through all these analytical work
> with regard to the Coulombs slanders, and played a keu role in
> having the Society for Psychical Research changing its position. In
> 1986, in part due to Carrithers's efforts, the SPR did abandon all
> its charges of fraud against H.P.B. That meant the Coulombs were
> abandoned as source os historical facts or testimonies.
> >
> > Daniel is trying to go the other way around. He is attempting to
> absorb those lies into the theosophical literature.
> >
> > As to "keeping certain things (slanders) to experienced
> theosophists", anyone who reads me at Theos-talk can see I am open
> and frank, so this accusation does not stick. I just recognize the
> basic fact that forgeries are no documents and cannot be accepted in
> theosophical books.
> >
> > The one who does not talk about Gregory Tillett's important
> biography of
> > C. W. Leadbeater is Daniel Caldwell.
> >
> > I see Daniel writing much more about slanders against HPB, and
> describing them as "testimonies", than about the true facts about C.
> W. Leadbeater, or James Wedgwood, etc.
> >
> > Regards, Carlos.
> >
> >
> >
> > De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > Cópia:
> >
> > Data:Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:23:35 -0000
> >
> > Assunto:Theos-World Aveline Versus Carrithers???? & the Tillett
> biography, etc.
> >
> > > Carlos Aveline writes:
> > >
> > > ==============================================
> > > Here. . . is Daniel making propaganda of
> > > well-known slanders against H.P. Blavatsky, which
> > > he calls "firsthand testimonies".
> > > In fact, they are second-hand and well-known lies.
> > > ==============================================
> > >
> > > Now compare Aveline's statement with that of
> > > Walter Carrithers:
> > >
> > > ==============================================
> > > ...Emma Coulomb's pamphlet...takes precedence over
> > > all others in standing at the very heart of the controversy
> > > raised by the Coulombs, comprising as it does the FIRSTHAND
> > > unadulterated TESTIMONY of the chief accusers, together with
> > > documentary "proofs" adduced for their claims.
> > > ==============================================
> > >
> > > Caps added.
> > >
> > > In several emails Carlos tries to tell readers that
> > > Emma Coulomb's account is not testimony, is not firsthand
> > > testimony....
> > >
> > > To pretend that this is not Coulomb's testimony is downright
> > > silly. And to try to hide it and say that it should only be
> > > available to researchers or "experienced" Theosophists is
> > > in my opinion also equally silly. Oh, heavens, inquirers and
> > > new students might be confused and not be able to handle it,
> > > reminds me of some of the excuses I've heard before for
> > > keeping Tillett's book on Leadbeater in a special place not
> > > easily available in a Theosophical Library. I once was told by
> > > a librarian of a certain Theosophical library that the Tillett
> > > biography was kept in a reference area away from the general
> > > books because inquirers and new students might be confused
> > > by the contents, and OBTW, the book is very one sided and only
> > > gives the slanders against CWL....
> > >
> > > Sound familiar????
> > >
> > > OBTW, below is a link to Emma Coulomb's testimony about
> > > the Masters:
> > >
> > > http://blavatskyarchives.com/coulombandhodgson.htm#Coulomb
> > >
> > > Daniel
> > > http://hpb.cc
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell"
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Notice that in what Carlos writes below
> > > > he does NOT address the issue concerning
> > > > the reprint of the entire Coulomb pamphlet
> > > > by the Edmonton Theosophical Society.
> > > >
> > > > An inquiring mind might also ask:
> > > >
> > > > IF....IF Daniel is circulating "slanders," IS the
> > > > ETS ALSO guilty of ciculating
> > > > "slanders" by publishing the ENTIRE Coulomb pamphlet
> > > > and with NO WORD (not even in the FINAL pages) warning the
> modern
> > > > reader about the content of this "disgusting" pamphlet???
> > > >
> > > > These are the kinds of questions one should be asking as
> > > > one tries to understand Carlos' reasoning in this matter
> > > > and the validity of his contentions concerning this subject.
> > > >
> > > > I hope Carlos does NOT have a double standard in assessing and
> > > > judging such matters.
> > > >
> > > > Remember:
> > > >
> > > > "...what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander."
> > > >
> > > > Personally I do NOT believe I was ciculating "slanders" and I
> do
> > > > not believe that ETS was circulating "slanders". Both TPH by
> > > > publishing my book and the ETS by reprinting the Coulomb
> pamphlet
> > > > were both performing a needed service of providing interested
> > > > individuals with relevant historical documents. It is for each
> > > > individual reading these two books to determine for themselves
> the
> > > > truthfulness or falsity of the statements made.
> > > >
> > > > And of course, it IS Emma Coulomb's TESTIMONY even though
> Carlos
> > > > apparently wants to play a word game here.
> > > >
> > > > I close this posting with a quote about the Coulomb pamphlet
> from
> > > my
> > > > late friend Walter A. Carrithers, Jr. (who wrote under the
> assumed
> > > > name of Adlai E. Waterman):
> > > >
> > > > ==================================================
> > > > It is safe to calculate that for every ten thousand persons
> who
> > > have
> > > > heard and believe that Richard Hodgson "exposed" H.P.
> Blavatsky as
> > > a
> > > > fraud and imposter, not more than one has read his "expose;"
> and,
> > > > that for every thousand of his readers, hardly one has ever
> seen
> > > > Emma Coulomb's pamphlet.
> > > >
> > > > And yet, by logic and every rule of common sense, the latter
> > > > document takes precedence over all others in standing at the
> very
> > > > heart of the controversy raised by the Coulombs, comprising as
> it
> > > > does the firsthand unadulterated TESTIMONY of the chief
> accusers,
> > > > together with documentary "proofs" adduced for their claims.
> > > >
> > > > Yet, strange to say, practically no attention was paid to this
> > > > PRICELESS PAMPHLET - least of all by indignant Theosophists
> [like
> > > > Carlos?????] who put no stock in what Mme. Coulomb might have
> to
> > > > say! -, not until, that is, the appearance in 1937 of Mrs.
> > > Hastings'
> > > > booklet, Defence of Madame Blavatsky (Volume II) The "Coulomb
> > > > Pamphlet". Unfortunately, Mrs. Hastings did not live to
> complete
> > > > her promising study of the case.
> > > > =====================================================
> > > >
> > > > I have added caps to Walter's own words in describing the
> Coulomb
> > > > pamphlet:
> > > >
> > > > TESTIMONY and PRICELESS PAMPHLET !!!!
> > > >
> > > > Daniel
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "carlosaveline"
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Dear Friends,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't see contradiction in my two paragraphs quoted by
> Daniel.
> > > > >
> > > > > Indeed, in his disgusting and sad book, there is "no word
> from
> > > > the 'editor' Daniel Cadlwell admitting he is publishing
> documents
> > > > which have no trace of truth in them whatsoever".
> > > > >
> > > > > He only says that those texts are not likely to be true, or
> > > > something similar, and thus he follows the well-known "maybe
> > > > policy".
> > > > >
> > > > > And even this he writes in a way which the average reader
> will
> > > > most likely NOT SEE.
> > > > >
> > > > > John Algeo did the same thing with the HPB Letters. Some 20
> per
> > > > cent of the texts published by Algeo in his "HPB Letters"
> volume
> > > I --
> > > > - are fake.
> > > > >
> > > > > Caldwell was more modest -- but then, he was the pioneer in
> > > > publishing semi-unidentified lies and libels as if they were
> part
> > > > of the theosophical literature.
> > > > >
> > > > > In the introduction of his unfortunate boook, Caldwell
> > > > calls "testimonies" those open and shameful lies.
> > > > >
> > > > > No honest editor or Historian can do such a thing. I still
> > > hope
> > > > in the future Caldwell will realize that this is not the
> proper
> > > > thing to do.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards, Carlos Cardoso Aveline
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> > > > >
> > > > > Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> > > > >
> > > > > Cópia:
> > > > >
> > > > > Data:Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:33:45 -0000
> > > > >
> > > > > Assunto:Theos-World "No proper identification": Do we have a
> > > good
> > > > example with the ETS reprint???
> > > > >
> > > > > > Readers,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please notice the progression here:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Originally Carlos wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "In the disgusting volume The Esoteric World of Madame
> > > > Blavatsky —
> > > > > > while believing the editor has selected truthful
> documents —
> > > the
> > > > > > reader will bump into many of the lies written against
> HPB.
> > > > There he
> > > > > > will see two texts by Emma Coulomb (pp. 35-36 and pp. 210-
> 215)
> > > > with
> > > > > > no word from the 'editor' Daniel Cadlwell admitting he is
> > > > publishing
> > > > > > documents which have no trace of truth in them whatsoever."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Notice Carlos' words:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "....no word from the 'editor' Daniel Cadlwell
> admitting ...."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now after I have pointed out repeatedly that this is
> simply
> > > not
> > > > true
> > > > > > by quoting directly from my book several statements
> showing
> > > that
> > > > > > what Carlos wrote is not accurate, Carlos apparently backs
> off
> > > > from
> > > > > > his "NO WORD" stance and writes instead:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Only in the final pages of his sad book he made
> commentaries
> > > > > > admitting those 'texts' were likely not authentic."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Well I guess we should be happy with his apparent
> concession
> > > and
> > > > > > retraction of his original statement!!!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But now we must puzzle over his definition of FINAL in the
> > > > > > phrase "the FINAL pages"....
> > > > > >
> > > > > > because more than 100 pages BEFORE the final pages of the
> book
> > > I
> > > > > > wrote at the appropriate place about the Coulomb attack
> having
> > > > no
> > > > > > solid foundation....
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anyway moving on....
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If Carlos is really "upset" because I gave "no proper
> > > > > > identification" about the Coulomb testimony, then is the
> > > > following
> > > > > > example another example of what Carlos would consider "no
> > > proper
> > > > > > identification."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In 1995, the Edmonton Theosophical Society (who is also
> the
> > > > > > publisher of Fohat where Carlos originally wrote his above
> > > > quoted
> > > > > > words about my book) REPRINTED the ENTIRE 112 pages of
> Madame
> > > > > > Coulomb's "disgusting" (to use Aveline's description)
> > > pamphlet.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > They published the ENTIRE pamphlet and sold it. A
> > > correspondent
> > > > of
> > > > > > mine originally wrote me informing me that he had bought
> this
> > > > > > reprint and I in turn bought copies although I had a copy
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > original.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Nowhere in the reprint by ETS is there ONE WORD warning
> > > today's
> > > > > > readers about the contents of this volume....not even in
> the
> > > > FINAL
> > > > > > pages of this reprint!!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Maybe Carlos should dash off a letter to FOHAT and ETS
> telling
> > > > them
> > > > > > that they should have done differently....that they should
> not
> > > > have
> > > > > > reprinted this DISGUSTING volume...and with "no proper
> > > > > > identification." !!!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Daniel
> > > > > > http://hpb.cc
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra.
> > > Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite
> > > http://mail.terra.com.br/protected_email/imail/imail.cgi?
> +_u=carlosaveline&_l=1,1145377426.428052.29435.arrino.terra.com.br,13
> 336,Des15,Des15
> > >
> > > Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> > > Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 17/04/2006 /
> Versão: 4.4.00/4742
> > > Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra.
> Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite
> http://mail.terra.com.br/protected_email/imail/imail.cgi?+_u=carlosaveline&_l=1,1145388357.384624.2342.tulear.hst.terra.com.br,20487,Des15,Des15
>
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 18/04/2006 / Versão: 4.4.00/4743
> Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
