Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00288)

JHE writes to Kim,

>       Therefore, when I see a chart or a piece of writing, I
> always want to know from the top: 1. Who wrote/made it?  2. What
> was the date of writing and which publication? 3. Place of
> publication?  4. How does it fit with the author's other
> writings? 5. How does it fit with the extant writings at the time
> of production and publication? 6. What was the extant of
> influence of this work?
>       Of course, by asking these questions, I'm taking the much
> disparaged "historical view" that is criticized almost on a
> weekly bases on theos-l.  It seems that Dan Caldwell and Myself
> are the sole contributors that have ever attempted to defend this
> approach on theos-l.


You are right that only you and Dan defend this position, but I for one
wholeheartedly support it.  I simply don't have the MSS resources or the
incredible background you and Dan Caldwell have to make most of my cases this
way.  I think the questions you are asking and the proedure you are following
is the only way to explain how original Theosophy differs from neo-Theosophy,
and goes a long way toward explaining WHY they differ.

Though often silent on this point, I am behind you 110% in spirit.