Theos-Talk Archives (February 2008 Message tt00291)

1.
Frank wrote:
"So, from the logic point of view, HPB was refering to her occult successor
in the Tibeto-Dzyan-transmission line."

That is not logic. That was not what H. P. Blavatsky said.
H. P. Blavatsky said: "In Century the Twentieth some disciple more informed, 
and far better fitted, may be sent by the Masters of Wisdom to give final 
and irrefutable proofs that there exists a Science called Gupta-Vidya"

That is "irrefutable proofs that there exists a Science called Gupta-Vidya".
This proof would be given by a disciple more informed and far better fitted, 
than who? Logically a person more informed and better fitted Than H. P. 
Blavatsky herself. And that is why such a person much likely would be known 
to the public, and not a person whom only a very few would learn about!
This is a more likely view than the one you prefer to emphasise.
What "irrefutable proofs that there exists a Science called Gupta-Vidya" are 
better than to show people it all through action and to be an example to 
tohers?

-------------------------------

Morten,
yes, the disciple would be more informed and better fitted than Blavatsky, 
therefore she could have been meant the 1975 messenger, but rather a chela 
in the gurparampara.
As you can see, you have missed be point, for I was refering to that logic 
before, the logic which you reject and at the same time you admit it.

But HPB never said, that and how much this disciple which would be send to 
the West, would be known to the public. That is but your - unbased - 
interpretation, not HPB's meaning.

She also says nothing about the quantity of people who could learn from it. 
That is your - unbased - interpretation, too.

And I am sorry to say, that HPB does not say anything about the time frame 
she had in mind. It can be relatively few people from the time of getting 
started, but in the course of time - and Masters think in centuries, a 
mantra GdeP always used - after decades or centuries the quantity could grow 
much from such a nucleus. So, it's but your interpretation, too.

HPB writes only that this proofs will be given, she gives no time line for 
publication. She hints rather to a time capsule.

-------------------------------

2.
Frank wrote:
"Sai Baba may be a fine teacher for some people, but he is certainly not
trained in the Dzyan school and therefore no messenger of the Dzyan and
Masters and Wisdom and Peace."

You claim a lot here. Do you know who Sathya Sai Baba is?
What are you basing your views in the above on?
Why should your view be given any validity at all?
-------------------------------

I claim nothing. I just share my opinion with you.
My view has only the validity someone gives.
You are free to believe what you want.
I do the same.

Best
Frank