Theos-Talk Archives (October 2006 Message tt00222)

Oct. 17, 2006

Dear Daniel Caldwell,

In you attached email you have stated that you doubt that others are interested in your motives.  Well, you may perhaps be incorrect on that point.  I for one am quite interested in hearing what your motives and agenda and intentions are?

Thus far I have observed very astute academic debate coming from you in which anything and everything coming from another party is pulled apart and used against them regardless of the overall context of their letter.  Anyone who has been in debate courses, debate clubs,and academic circles recognizes those tactics and also recognizes that those tactics are utilized to win by making points and generally have nothing to do with establishing truth.

If the mahatma quote is to be utilized than perhaps it also applies to the doubts and lies spread by the book THE LETTERS OF H. P. BLAVATSKY: Volume 1,1861-1879 Edited by John Algeo.  According to your very quote you have utilized in the attached email letter, it appears you have just called John Algeo a NON-THEOSOPHIST, since many of the letters cast aspersions, doubt, slander, and lies about the greatest modern theosophical teacher in the prior two centuries.  If the mahatmas did anything, they revered and showed gratitude to and about H.P.Blavatsky.

One does not need to guess at the motive(s) of such action by so called theosophists and editors.  The actions speak for themselves, both for and about the editor and those that promote and stand behind such actions both by commission and omission.

Almost every sincere and serious theosophical student learns quickly that it is an error to "bite the hand that feeds you" and, that who one chooses as teachers is of paramount importance.  When others see either Ledbetter, Besant, Algeo and others allowing doubt and aspersion to fall upon H.P.B. than such action is seen by any astute, sincere, and serious student as false propaganda with ulterior motives of moving the student on to a false path of the propagandizer's own agenda.

Mr. Caldwell, you and Carlos Aveline and everyone, including myself, who considers themselves a sincere, serious student and promoter of theosophy will be doing well to internalize the theosophical compassionate and altruistic attitude and stop being a person who is one who puts themselves in a position of "the pot calling the kettle black."

>From where I sit, Mr. Caldwell, your compilation of theosophical history has utilized hearsay and innuendo in ever form imaginable as letters from prior theosophists are generally their own opinion and observation and those may or may not be true, but are simply their own views.  Among views expressed some have been made by yourself about successors which I have found false, and in a future email I will express those exceptions in greater detail.  The United Lodge of Theosophists was threatened by lawsuit in court by the Adyar Theosophy group in the 1920s and sworn testimony was taken by the lawyers for the U.L.T. which refutes some of the hearsay evidence you present.

Much of this is public record and is available to all theosophists, academics, and others on the Wisdom World website under theosophical history.  Unfortunately, many theosophists do not research much history about their own teachers before spending a great deal of their precious time studying misleading teachings.

Mr. Caldwell, your western academic attitude of throwing everything out into the pubic arena is a dangerous practice of putting everything out and letting the public sort it out.  This practice is exactly why both prior and present schools do not allow out certain information that can be profaned, misinterpreted, and unfortunately abused.  An obvious example of this with even public knowledge is the profaning and abuse of the Secret Doctrine by anti-Semites and neo-Nazis.

Now Mr. Caldwell you are promoting so-called esoteric written materials which may be further abused, misused, and profaned.  You will, according to the very materials you promote, reap the consequences and further karma of your own choices and action.  So be it.

Now, since you Mr. Caldwell have brought up the subject of what may be boring to others, what is boring to me is your consistent dwelling on modern theosophical history rather than the philosophy itself.  I have heard you raise the issue of asking for theosophical philosophy talk and yet you continue to push your brand and interest in theosophical history. It appears that by doing so you are being the person who is the pot calling the kettle black and then throwing in some Mahatma quote when it suits your agenda.  I suggest you follow your own advice and quotes.

Speaking of quotes, since I can probably expect some kind of response, would you please use my entire letter in quoting me instead of using the academic debating tactic of tearing it apart and twisting it to your own use.  Do you do that, of course you do!  If this challenge is to great for you then you will be demonstrating to the whole site the tactics you use for your own agenda.

Getting back to the beginning of this letter,  what is your agenda, your motives and your intentions?  You said that you were sure others are not interested, when in reality obviously some are, I am, and I look forward to your reply.  Please note that I have attached your entire email which prompted my email.

As it is, enough has been said by myself and I will write more in a future email.

Sincerely,
Gary B  

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: danielhcaldwell 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 10:44 AM
  Subject: Theos-World Re: Daniel's Motives


  Carlos, you write to me:

  > I was waiting for your own revelations as to your motives.

  Well, since you seem to know what my motives are, why need I explain 
  them to you!? :)

  Actually you seem to be almost the only person on Theos-Talk 
  interested in any one's motives or in assigning motives for example 
  to Algeo, Hesselink, Johnson, etc. I'm sure most subscribers on 
  Theos-Talk could care less what my motives are, what your motives 
  are, etc. etc. They probably consider such "talk" as boring, etc.

  I for one have no interest in your motives or anyone elses' 
  motives. I am interested in Theosophical history and Theosophical 
  teachings so will focus my postings to those subjects.

  You as well as all of us on Theos-Talk might calm the chattering of 
  our own minds and ponder these words from a Master:

  ". . . no Theosophist should blame a brother whether within or
  outside of the association, throw slur upon his actions or denounce
  him . . . lest he should himself lose the right of being considered
  a theosophist. Ever turn away your gaze from the imperfections of
  your neighbour and centre rather your attention upon your own
  shortcomings in order to correct them and become wiser . . . ." 
  ". . . . . Do not indulge in unbrotherly comparisons between
  the task accomplished by yourself and the work left undone by your
  neighbour or brother, in the field of Theosophy, as none is held to
  weed out a larger plot of ground than his strength and capacity will
  permit him . . . Do not be too severe on the merits or demerits of
  one who seeks admission among your ranks, as the truth about the
  actual state of the inner man can only be known to, and dealt with
  justly by KARMA alone. Even the simple presence amidst you of a well-
  intentioned and sympathising individual may help you
  magnetically . . ." 

  Some of us might then not only ponder these words but try to live 
  them in our lives.

  Daniel
  http://hpb.cc



   

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]