Theos-Talk Archives (January 2007 Message tt00242)

Friends,


Caldwell writes below:

"And I would think that Mr. Carlos Aveline who apparently portrays
himself as a great defender of Madame Blavatsky and the Masters..."

Caldwell is wrong here. It is obvious that I am but practicing 
English as a second language while sharing a few ideas with friends. 

Mr. Caldwell goes on to say that I should:  

"... Show MORE INTEREST in correcting the misleading ideas promoted 
in Johnson's books than in combatting my efforts to promote HPB and 
the Masters. Unfortunately, Mr. Aveline devotes 1000 times more 
effort in combatting my Blavatsky work than combatting the 
misleading ideas found in Mr. Johnson's work and books which are to 
be found in hundreds of libraries in the world and available through 
a major publisher and Amazon.com, etc."

To this, I say:

FIRST.

D. Caldwell, "D. Green" and J. Algeo promoted Paul Johnson within 
the theosophical movement,  used him and his books  for their own 
Loyolian "political" purposes and them "discarded" him. This is a 
cold-blooded form manipulation of misinformed people. This  sort of 
method has nothing to do with "Blavatsky" or Theosophy, but is 
familiar to the Society of Jesus and Opus Dei. Just as slanders of 
all kinds against anyone who opposes them -- conveniently  made 
under "alternative names" --   are, too.   

SECOND. 

One who did not infiltrate the theosophical movement does no  harm 
to it.  People at large are invited to believe HPB or not,  and to 
write whatever  they like. Infiltrating to slander from within while 
using false names is quite another,  and Jesuitic,  thing. Actually, 
Johnson has done the movement a favour when he unmasked "Mr. Green" 
and some of the other false identities used by our Loyolian 
brother,  Mr. Daniel Caldwell. 

THIRD. 

Caldwell is not doing "Blavatsky work".  H. P. Blavastky never 
personalized the movement. She was not a follower of herself, 
to "Blavatsky", and did not want anyone to follow her blindly. HPB  
was loyal to the CAUSE.  It is the job of traitors and Jesuits to 
turn things personal. Jesuits transform Christianism in a personal 
following to Jesus, just as Daniel Caldwell wants to transform the 
whole issue of Theosophy in something limited to "Blavatsky".  That 
is perhaps why his  Archives are not called "Theosophy Archives 
Online". His project is to get Theosophy transferred down to the 
level of mere personalism, and hence gossips and slanders.   In 
that, too, Mr. Crosbie was right: personalities are the blank of 
Jesuits and traitors. Instead of seeing a philosophy, they talk 
about personality names.  Yet no truth seeker will go very far if he 
is not attacked at his personality level. This is in the "Mahatma 
Letters" too, and it is part of his occult training. The important 
thing, then, is that Daniel is not doing any "HPB work". She had 
respect for esoteric tradition and he hasn't. She fought her 
slanderers and he promotes them. She supported the movement and he 
fights it using false identities and sowing dissension.   And so on. 



I hope this helps Mr. Caldwell and his "various personalities" 
understand things a little. 


Best regards,   Carlos. 
 



--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell" 
<danielhcaldwell@...> wrote:
>
> Let me just take one of Paul Johnson's
> comments about me and look at it in some
> detail to see if there is any substance to it.
> 
> Paul Johnson once wrote about me:
> 
> ==========================================================
> I have been the most frequent "beneficiary"
> of such treatment from Caldwell, who has delighted in stirring up
> fundamentalist Theosophists into rage against my books.
> ==========================================================
> 
> In this one sentence written by Mr. Johnson, there are alot 
> of assumptions!!  These appear to be:
> 
> (1)  I was delighted....
> 
> (2)  My intent was aimed at "fundamentalist Theosophists".
> 
> (3)  I wanted to create a "rage" against his books.
> 
> etc. etc.
> 
> Look at all of his assumptions...one piled on top of another.
> 
> I ask readers:  isn't all of the above simply an example of Mr. 
> Johnson's projecting his own ideas on to what I was doing?  I 
> actually don't know where he got these ideas from...maybe from 
> the "ether"!  But they certainly don't reflect what I was doing or 
> thinking....
> 
> In my published essays and in my postings on Theos-Talk, etc., I 
> always tried to deal with the substance of his statements, thesis, 
> assertions, etc. concerning HPB's Masters.
> 
> See my essays at:
> 
> http://blavatskyarchives.com/johnson.htm
> 
> Apparently Mr. Johnson was more interested in talking about me 
than 
> in discussing or elucidating his own ideas about HPB's Masters.  
> Why?  
> 
> My sole interest was in Mr. Johnson's books and his statements 
> therein about HPB and the Masters.  But for reasons best known to 
Mr. 
> Johnson he wanted to change the subject to me.
> 
> See my essays at <http://blavatskyarchives.com/johnson.htm>, that 
was 
> the focus on my interest and attention and to this day I could 
care 
> less about Mr. Johnson himself.  I have no interest in him or his 
> psychology, his motives, etc.  But his books are still out there 
and 
> available and to this day I receive from time to time inquiries 
from 
> readers asking for input about his books and the statements he 
makes 
> about the Masters.
> 
> And I would think that Mr. Carlos Aveline who apparently portrays 
> himself as a great defender of Madame Blavatsky and the Masters 
would 
> show MORE INTEREST in correcting the misleading ideas promoted in 
> Johnson's books than in combatting my efforts to promote HPB and 
the 
> Masters.  Unfortunately, Mr. Aveline devotes 1000 times more 
effort 
> in combatting my Blavatsky work than combatting the misleading 
ideas 
> found in Mr. Johnson's work and books which are to be found in 
> hundreds of libraries in the world and available through a major 
> publisher and Amazon.com, etc.
> 
> Strange....
> 
> Daniel
> http://hpb.cc
>