Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl01294)

Alexis writes to Daniel:

>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.

Daniel responds:

Alexis, I sent Johnson packing?  I simply criticized some of his statements
in his books.
I never called him names or said he was a bad person.  I even said I enjoyed
his books,
found them thought provoking and even recommended that people read them!  If he
"left", he choose to do so.  I assume he just didn't like me criticizing
what he had written.
But I believe I had a right to do that.

 "Your bunch"????  Give me a break!

 Yes, Johnson had at one point said he thought I had sold my soul to the
established Theosophical groups.  Why? I guess because I had made certain
criticisms of his book and there HAD  to be some sinister, hidden reason
behind my criticisms.

 And, oh, BTW, you haven't
confused me.  If you enjoy believing that you have, then continue believing so.

Some of your remarks are so amusing.

DHC







>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
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>