Theos-Talk Archives (November 1996 Message tl00136)

Daniel,

What do you consider to be the primary source documents? Who authored
them? How do they, in your opinion, establish the proof of the Masters
and non-historical texts like "The Stanzas of Dyzan"? How do they
vindicate HPB, Besant or Leadbeater from any wrongdoing?

If, in your opinion, they do, how do you know they do for certain?

Of all the material in Washington's book (admittedly a "secondary"
source) that casts Blavatsky, et al, in questionable light (take your
pick, esp. from chapters 3 and 4, and in particular the situation with
the Board of Trustees and Madame Coulomb over letters, false-faced
shrine cabinets and apparition puppets, pgs. 80-84), how do you defend
them?

Is it your personal opinion that nothing whatsoever questionable went on
and that Washington's reportage and point of view (being secondary) are
therfore altogether inaccurate?

Do you hold keys to historicity in these matters? Are you charged with
dispensing the official society imprimatur?

Mark