Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl01272)

At 12:31 PM 4/27/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Alexis,
>you write:
>
>> When you combine these, which are
>>a very concise version of my objections [to anthropogenesis] , with my
>equal objections to the
>>Cosmo genesis. I think you can understand why I prefer "Isis Unveiled" to
>>the "Secret Doctrine"......
>
>As you well know, Morya and Kut Humi : )   in the Mahatma Letters (1880-1882)
>wrote on Atlantis, Lemuria and the root races.  I guess they were mistaken,
too?
>Or did they make "intentional" mistakes?  Or write using blinds?

Well I suppose to folks who take those letters as gospel, that's the final
no plea answer. But I don't, those letters, as far as I am concerned are
only alleged to be from the signers thereof Not being an "On Faith"
theosophist they aren't the Court of Final Appeal to me that they obviously
are to you..

>But even in your ISIS UNVEILED, HPB writes of Atlantis, "the great lost
>continent" and
>mentions various races before our present race.  Sounds familiar to her more
>detailed
>exposition in THE SECRET DOCTRINE?  Hopefully, you have razorbladed those
>paragraphs
>out of your copy of ISIS.  : )  And I have found similar paragraphs in ISIS
>that echo what
>HPB says later in THE SECRET DOCTRINE on that cosmogenesis stuff to which
>you object.

I have never said I am in agreement with every word only that I am in accord
with the over-all flavour. I don't "razor blade" things I'll leave
censorship to folks like you. But I have never read a book with which I
agree unreservedly and I probably never will. So What?
>
>Oh BTW, exactly what teaching does HPB present in any of her writings that
>you don't
>object to?  Please list a few of them and I will give them to some of my
>scientist friends
>to see if these teachings accord with present day scientific findings and
>studies.

Daniel: I am not Paul Johnson and you will not send me "packing" the way you
and your bunch did him. So forget it! Now, let's get this straight, and I'll
put it as carefully as possible so as not to confuse you.

The things that H.P.B. wrote and said that I agree with strongly have
nothing at all to do with either science or cosmogenesis. It is my personal
belief that those things are far to risky to base something useful, which I
believe theosophy to be, on them. What I agree with are her views on
religion, on questioning authority (which is why I bother you so much
Daniel), on introducing to Western Intellectuals the fact that intellectuals
and philosophers and other thinkers exist somewhere else than in Europe, and
that Western Materialism wasn';t the all and end-all. I believe in the kind
of open minded attitude she brought to everything (the kind you certainly
don't possess). I enjoy the spirit of fun she brought to all the things she
did. (Once again unlike you). I strongly agree with her attitude toward
Christianity, which mirrors my own. I try very hard to live the motto of the
society Satyat-nasti-paro-dharma, and I strongly support the three objects,
as far as I'm concerned all the rest could be balderdash and it wouldn't
matter at all.

I think even you will take my meaning when I sign myself formally:

H.S.H. Alexis Alexandreivitch, Prince Dolgorukii of Uriev

>
>
>
>