Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl01145)

At 02:17 PM 4/25/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Alexis,
>Thanks for your answers and comments to my questions.
>
>Do I detect a trace of irritation or impatience in some of your comments to
>me?

Just a teeny-weeny bit. I am, after all a Dolgorukii, and our "irritation
threshold" is famously low.

>I'm sorry if you feel I have been needlessly questioning you.   But when you
>make certain statements without documentation, etc., I have no idea what your
>statements are based upon.  I cannot read your mind.  Is it so unreasonable to
>ask for some additional details?

Daniel:

Some of your questions seem to me to result from aimless curiosity. For
instance, you keep asking for my full genealogy, I fail to see why or how
this could benefit you as I have made absolutely clear the connection
between Yelena Petrovna and myself. How would my other familial connections,
which date back before the Common Era, benefit you in your particular field
of study. I am a direct descendent of Rurik the Goth, how would that relate
to theosophical studies?

Others seem to ask for written documentation for things that cannot be
written, for instance Yelena Petrovna's sexuality. Obviously the only
sources I have are her familial ties and friends of hers who were also
friends of my Grandfather. You have the choice of accepting my word as to
his word, or not. Other questions ask me for sources (re; The Masters) which
I am not at liberty to divulge. As I hope you have already experienced, when
I am permitted to do so, I give you everything you ask for. When I am not
permitted to do so, I give you as much as I can. Sometimes, Daniel, in this
field of endeavour, sources are unusual to say the least.

Now most of what you call "interesting ideas" and I thank you for thinking
them interesting, especially as they refer to the dichotomy between Mme.
Blavatsky and H.P.B./Narayan and to the Adepts or Mahatmas (they are
identical things) are not the result of speculation but are the result of
personal knowledge, discount this as you will.


>Concerning point #4 below, you said that you had just written something on
>that in another post.  I have not seen that post.  Which one is it?

Daniel: It had to do with your fourth question, which I am totally
embarrassed to admit I have forgotten. If you can remember the question, I
will repeat the answer. D'accord?


>
>Daniel
>
alexis dolgorukii, MTI.,FTSA.
the eclectic theosophist
satyat - nasti - paro - dharma
Shaman, Healer, Psychic, Tulku