Theos-Talk Archives (February 2008 Message tt00380)

Nigel wrote:
--------------------------------
Dear Frank

Thank you again for your response.

You write, "I don't get your point.
What makes you so sure to know what HPB has planed
in 1875?"

Actually I have not been shown conclusive evidence
that she planned anything at all in terms of
preparing, ".the world for the coming of a great
spiritual teacher expected in the last quarter of
the 20th century in 1975" for reasons already stated.

She carried out the work intended for her and suggested
the above may occur subject to criteria already stated.
--------------------------------
Frank:
Dear Nigel,
me thought, you were quiet sure that HPB had no plans in 1875 for future 
work of successive messengers.
--------------------------------
Nigel wrote:
You write, "when HPB wrote about him in 1888, he was
already there."

Can you please supply credible evidence to support
this contention?

--------------------------------
Frank:
Possibly. That depends on some conditions.
I need to now, what you would accept as evidence.
Also I need to know whether you accept the occult office of a messenger to 
the Masters.
We are talking here about esoteric matters and thinks are difficult.
--------------------------------
Nigel wrote:

You write, "HPB used the term "send", which is a
flexible term and a blind, too. She says here that
the karmic ring or connection between her and her
successor is done and it depends of the karma of
the theosophists and TS, whether the new teacher
is "send" or made known."

Can you also please supply credible evidence to support
these contentions?

--------------------------------
Frank:
Perhaps Purucker's hints about the insignia majestatis will be of help:
http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/teachers/te-gdp7.htm

--------------------------------
Nigel wrote:
You write, "That he intermixes the occult status
and titles of the persons mentioned is also clear.
That people have wrong pictures in mind is not the
fault of HPB. Therefore she was careful with her
statements, so much, that she is not understood,
except perhaps by those, who it may concern."

Once again can you kindly provide credible evidence
for this?

--------------------------------
Frank:
It's self-evident. HPB's discussion of the work of a messenger of 1897 and 
the work of the 1975 messenger are logically two different things.
I don't know what is so difficult to understand.
--------------------------------
Nigel wrote:
Frank with respect, you write with quite adamant
authority. You often claim that some of us have
wrong perspectives whilst providing little hard
evidence of a credible nature to me to support
your contentions. I hope you might be able to do
so on this occasion.

--------------------------------
Frank:
Really!!??
Perhaps I need to brush up my English.
I just share with all open-minded students the results of my study.
These results are personal opinion.
You or Morten or others have other opinions.
If I think, they are wrong, I speak out.
You have given me also no hard evidence that HPB did not work for her 
succeccors and the 1975 messenger.
And I wonder which evidence I could give you, while the living and the work 
of our great ones speaks for themselves.
Should I send you a certificate, singed by a President of a TS, in which is 
stated: "Yes, Frank is right, HPB did prepatory work for the 1975 messenger.
And yes, Frank is also right, that the 1897 messenger is not identical with 
the 1975 messenger?"