Theos-Talk Archives (August 2006 Message tt00092)

Carlos wrote:

===============================================
I had to laugh, physically and nicely, upon reading this sentence in
your message:

" ( ... ) I don't believe in the Coulombs or in Soloviof.
I believe both the Coulombs and Soloviof turned against
Madame Blavatsky and lied about her."

As a good laugh is always good for health, I must thank you.

I will probably quote these two sentences of yours in the future!

So you do CONFESS you do KNOW you are circulating poison, false 
dollars, lies,SLANDERS.

Thanks for your transparency,
=======================================================


First I give a quote from HPB.  What HPB writes is apparently
something Aveline chooses to forget:

"...in the world mental as in the world spiritual each man
must progress by his own efforts. The writer cannot do the
reader's thinking for him, nor would the latter be any the
better off if such vicarious thought were possible..."

Now my comments.

I gave my opinion about the Coulomb material in
my book and I give below my reasons for including such
material:

In regards to Aveline's comments about the adding of
negative accounts by Coulomb and Hodgson, etc. to the
TPH Wheaton edition of my book THE ESOTERIC WORLD OF
MADAME BLAVATSKY, it was MY decision to add them so that readers
could see what the charges against HPB actually were,
ESPECIALLY since many of the other accounts by
"friendly" witnesses refer to these charges, and even
make comments about the charges, etc.

I saw no good reason to hide the "negative" accounts
from readers....

One might conclude from his various comments at Theos-Talk that Mr. 
Aveline doesn't want readers to read these accounts for themselves 
and come to THEIR OWN conclusions.

Also by giving these accounts in my book, the reader
can start to UNDERSTAND the RELEVANCE of what the
other witnesses say in their accounts.

Furthermore, I was motivated to include them in light
of what Madame Blavatsky once wrote:

"...Contrast alone can enable us to appreciate things
at their right value; and unless a judge compares
notes and hears both sides he can hardly come to a
correct decision." H.P. Blavatsky. The Theosophist,
July, 1881, p. 218.

I wanted the reader to be able to compare notes and
hear both sides. 

What is wrong with that? 

Doesn't Mr. Aveline want readers to do THEIR OWN comparing of
notes, etc.?

And CONTRARY to what Mr. Aveline has written before, some of the
editorial notes in my book do call the reader's
attention to the conflicting testimony and even to the
falsity of the charges against HPB.

Here are some of the notes to the readers in my book:

p. 185: "Her phenomena and the reality of her teachers
were both controversial matters, eliciting both
believing acceptance (sometimes with independent
confirmation) and skeptical rejection, as the
following selections will illustrate."

p. 205: "Emma Coulomb later claimed that she
collaborated with HPB at Adyar, as she had earlier in
Bombay, in producing false phenomena; however, her
descriptions of what she did are not consistent with
the observatations of others, who witnessed the
phenomena, both Indian and Westerners, as some of the
following selections demonstrate."

p. 263: "Meanwhile, a vicious attack on Blavatsky by
two of her staff members at Adyar, Alexis and Emma
Coulomb, was rapidly building up....She wished to sue
the couple, already dismissed from Adyar for their
gross libel concerning her supposedly fraudulent
production of psychic phenomena...."

p. 264: "The Coulomb attack, as was later evident, had
no solid foundation whatsoever. It was based on forged
and partially forged letters, purporting to have been
written by H.P. Blavatsky, with instructions to
arrange fraudulent psychic phenomena of various
kinds."

p. 264: "In 1963, Adlai Waterman....refuted Hodgson's
contentions against Madame Blavatsky....Another
refutation of some of Hodgson's charges against HPB is
Vernon Harison's article...."

p. 406: "In May 1884, the Coulomb couple were expelled
from the Theosophial Society for theft, attempted
extortion and slander...."

One might conclude that Mr. Aveline either didn't
carefully read my book to know about these notes or
else he didn't want his readers to know that I had
added such comments.

Surely the perceptive reader of all of these notes,
etc. in my book will be able to see that one should
take what these writers [Coulomb and Hodgson] say with
a few grains of salt.

Furthermore, I specifically selected the material by
Coulomb and Hodgson to put in JUXTAPOSITION with other
accounts which show that what they (Coulomb and
Hodgson) say about, for example, the appearances of
the Masters, must surely be off the mark, to say the
least or as I believe.....wrong...false.

See also:  
http://blavatskyarchives.com/mahatmasapparitions.htm

If anything, the accounts by the above "enemies" of
HPB found next to other accounts will make the reader
.... THINK .... about the charges and their validity.

And if they are perceptive at all, they should (at the
very least) conclude that the Coulomb/Hodgson charges
should not be taken at face value WITHOUT carefully
considering other material which is ALSO FOUND in the
book or what can be found in greater detail in the
Waterman and Harrison books.

Some of the thoughtful readers of my book may actually
dig deeper and try to determine for themselves what
really happened....instead of believing either Aveline
or me!!

Daniel
BLAVATSKY STUDY CENTER
http://blavatskyarchives.com
http://theosophy.info

========================================================
"...none but the logician, the investigator, the dauntless
explorer should meddle with books like this. Such delvers
after truth have the courage of their opinions."
H.P. Blavatsky

"...Contrast alone can enable us to appreciate things at
their right value; and unless a judge compares notes and
hears both sides he can hardly come to a correct decision."
H.P. Blavatsky

"...in the world mental as in the world spiritual each man
must progress by his own efforts. The writer cannot do the
reader's thinking for him, nor would the latter be any the
better off if such vicarious thought were possible..."
H.P. Blavatsky
=======================================================