Theos-Talk Archives (November 2006 Message tt01081)

Carlos,

You write to me:

=============================================================
Did the editor of "The Aquarian Theosophist" tell you that he thinks 
only the complete removal of fake letters from "HPB Letters" is 
acceptable?

No, he did not.

For a theosophist,this is only the best choice, or one of the best 
choices.

The decision of a scholar, publishing the fake letters properly 
identified, is perfectly OK.

As you know, a scholar is not a scoundrel. He has respect for the 
readers and for the truth.
============================================================

Carlos, I see that you are still using the word "fake" to describe
these letters.

Did you, first of all, read Gregory Tillett's posting titled:

"Fake HPB letters"  ??

You can read his posting at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/37811

Gregory starts his posting with:

==============================================================
I do not support the publication of "fake" letters of HPB (or anyone
else). However, a distinction must be made between "fake" and
"questionable" or "controversial".
==============================================================

Do you understand Gregory's distinction???

Furthermore, do you agree with his "distinction"????

Daniel
http://hpb.cc