Theos-Talk Archives (September 2006 Message tt00409)

Bruce,

Thanks for your further explanation of your own thinking about the 
1900 letter which you posted at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/36056

At the end of your posting, you ask:

"Do you think this plausible Daniel?"

Later this morning when I find a hour of quiet, I want
to try to answer this and also give a few of my thoughts
about the 1900 letter.  Also I hope to make a few general
observations about the views expressed by Bruce MacDonald, 
Dallas TenBroeck, Vernon Harrison, Walter Carrithers as
opposed to those of Jake Jaqua, Carlos Aveline and others
concerning whether this 1900 letter is genuine KH or a phoney
and forged letter.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc

Bruce wrote:
====================================================
Re: A Few Thoughts on the 1900 Letter 

Annie Besant was a disciple of a Prayag theosophist, Chakravarti. By
entering into such an arrangement she accepted much of the
superstitious psychic garbage that surrounded these deluded members,
dark planetaries and all. If the Masters were not going to waste a
letter on the Prayag theosophists, why on a Prayag disciple who
attacked one of their own in a display of utter ingratitude?

If the Masters were going to send a letter to anyone, would it not
have been to Olcott. Olcott was karmically responsible for the
Society, he was the President, and he was the last of the founders.
This letter to Besant could also be seen as an attack against Olcott,
playing further on his own doubts as to why the Masters ceased
communication with him. Olcott would pour over this letter and find
nothing in the generalities to give him a clue as to where he went
wrong. This letter could be argued to be serving karma by punishing a
doubt-ridden man. An enemy of theosophy might find this letter
satisfying on so many different levels.

Do you think this plausible Daniel?

Bruce
==========================================================