Theos-Talk Archives (March 2009 Message tt00260)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell" <danielhcaldwell@...> wrote:
>
> A chart with five columns about Jesus, but why only 5?
> 
> Anand writes:
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Somebody may make a chart with five columns Blavatsky, Leadbeater,
> Hodson, Besant, Arundale. And each column may contain writings about
> Jesus by respective authors. This will enable comparison. 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> This would be useful but why limit only to Anand's preferred Adyar
> authors of Leadbeater, Hodson, Besant, Arundale.
> 
> To be totally fair and coomprehensive, one should  include more
> Theosophical authors of other lineages and opposing claims such as:

It will be better if other authors, who claim to be occultists, are also included in this chart. 
But we need to remember that occultists, like any other scientist, are not infallible in their clairvoyant investigation. And just because their few observations are proved wrong does not mean that they were faking everything. Daniel always missed this point. He finds one fault in massive work of occultists and brand them as charlatans. This only proves that Daniel is not seasoned in philosophical thinking. Daniel must remember that every scientist and occultist uses his own faculties which are limited powers, and also their intelligence which interprets observations is also limited. Is there any Nobel prize winner scientist who never made mistake? Is there any saint who did not make any mistake in life ? Did Masters claim to be infallible? So finding one mistake and branding the person as charlatan only proves that Daniel himself did not understand important factors in research. 
Best
Anand Gholap