Theos-Talk Archives (November 1996 Message tl00053)

Doss -

Your reference to the book by Baborka would not be regarded as
conclusive evidence by serious scholars or TS history buffs if, as I
suspect, it was or still is published by the TS itself, which "edits"
the work of TS greats to expunge inconvenient writings of theirs.

I guess I am asking *you* for your view of the facts, and *your*
assessment of the evidence, not Barborka's.

Alan

In message <Pine.BSD/.3.91.961102171856.25257A-100000@matrix.eden.com>,
"m.k. ramadoss" <ramadoss@eden.com> writes
>On Sat, 2 Nov 1996, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote:
>
>> In message <Pine.BSD/.3.91.961102073218.504C-100000@matrix.eden.com>,
>> "m.k. ramadoss" <ramadoss@eden.com> writes
>> >       The production of the letters has been discussed rather
>> >extensively and all the evidence points out to  the authenticity of the
>> >letters.
>>
>> Errr ... how about:
>>
>> The production of the letters has been discussed rather
>> extensively and much of the evidence points out to the non-authenticity
>> of the letters.  Many who have studied them suspect the direct hand of
>> HPB in the production of certainly some of them.
>>
>> If you are going to make sweeping generalisations like "all the evidence
>> points to, etc." then you had better produce "all the evidence" and then
>> follow it up with a seriously reasoned case for the authenticity of the
>> letters being a fact.
>>
>> Alan
>
>
>The issue has been fully addressed in:
>
>       The Mahatmas and Their Letters by Geoffrey A Barborka
>        ISBN 0-8356-7062-7
>
>MKRamadoss
>

---------
THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age:
http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/
E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk