Theos-Talk Archives (May 2006 Message tt00699)

Carlos,

When you write in part:

======================================================
By tirelessly defending the legitimacy of Besant's third volume, 
which has been abandoned even by the Adyar TPH ( not to mention all 
other theosophical groups), perhaps the "Blavatsky Archives Online" 
are aiming at Boris de Zirkoff's work. 
 
For if that volume were legitimate, then Boris would have made a 
serious of grave mistakes.  It is not so. 
======================================================

it is somewhat sad to see you using this kind of DISTRACTION instead 
of dealing directly with the substance of my argument and the 
evidence presented.

The specific points that you apparently dare not address and in fact 
avoid are covered in the following postings:

SUMMARY: CW Vol. 14 heavily dependent on Besant's 3rd Volume 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/33538

MERE WRITTEN EVIDENCE??: "What the Occultists & Kabalists Have to 
Say" 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/33565

MERE WRITTEN EVIDENCE??: Part 2 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/33566

Daniel H. Caldwell
Blavatsky Study Center
http://blavatskyarchives.com
http://blavatskystudycenter.org