Theos-Talk Archives (November 2006 Message tt01145)

Carlos,

You write:

===============================================================
I would like to have a clear explanation, from you, on why 
publicizing things you know are false, and which attack the Masters 
and HPB...."
===============================================================

I have written on NUMEROUS occasions my clear explanation.  

Have you read and tried to understand what I have written on this 
subject?  I wonder.

But I give BELOW 2 excerpts from my previous postings which explain 
my rationale.

I am not expecting you to understand, let alone agree with my view 
and policy!!

Furthermore, I could care less if you either understand or agree with 
what I say.  But I post them for the record and for readers who are 
possibly interested.

So BELOW are the 2 excerpts

Daniel
http://hpb.cc

FIRST EXCERPT:

===============================================================
...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 and only MY
decision [not TPH Wheaton] 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 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 writes, 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....

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.

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!!...
==================================================


SECOND EXCERPT:

================================================================
...I just wanted to make the book "better"....by adding more RARE
material that I had discovered since the first edition was
published...material about the Masters, etc. ... and yes I wanted
to add more "negative" material...

First of all, a number of readers had written me after reading the
first edition, wanting to know more about the Hodgson/Coulomb
charges...What did Coulomb and Hodgson say? also I thought it was
a good idea to give some details in Coulomb's and Hodgson's own
words especially about the appearances of the Masters so readers
could read all that and ALSO read what the other witnesses said
about how the Masters appeared. Call it COMPARE AND CONTRAST.

I guess I was foolish enough to believe that readers would actually
appreciate having access to some of what Coulomb and Hodgson said!
But I guess I didn't understand the psychology of the "true
believer"! Who knows!!

The Coulomb and Hodgson testimony appears downright silly (at least
to me!) when you compare their explanations with those testimonies
of the witnesses who were privileged to see the Masters...all of
that is in my Quest book edition.....Some perceptive readers may
have picked up on that....So why hide the Coulomb/Hodgson testimony
from readers????

And I don't know if I have ever explained this before, but when
selecting material for both the original edition as well as the
Quest book edition of my book I purposely selected material for
inclusion that filled in the gaps in the one sided presentation of
both the Meade and Johnson books on HPB and the Masters. I can show
you testimony after testimony that I added for the very reason that
Meade and Johnson downplayed or simply omitted this relevant
testimony....

And as far as the issue of including more negative accounts of
Madame Blavatsky in my book, I am even more convinced that such
material should be included. People have a right to have access to
this material. I wanted to read this material as I tried to
understand Madame Blavatsky in earlier years of my own quest. So why
should I hide it from readers?

If readers are somehow confused or thrown off by this material, then
so be it. Maybe they should simply return to some simple new age
belief or return to whatever ism or ology they used to believe in.

Many years ago I left several orthodox faiths for the very reason
that these isms encourage one not to ask questions, not to look at
the opposing view, etc. etc.
==============================================================