Re: Biased books/theosophy
Aug 20, 1997 08:32 AM
by M K Ramadoss
At 10:55 AM 8/20/97 -0400, you wrote:
>K. Paul Johnson wrote:
>> Thanks, Bart, for the vote of confidence in my ability to
>> discern relatively unbiased authors. Of recent (1980-present)
>> writers of Theosophical history, Campbell seems the least
>> non-partisan. I have been amused by hearing a NYTS staff
>> member say the bookstore wouldn't carry Tillett because he was
>> biased, as if all the pro-TS stuff was not.
> Carrying Tillett is a bit problematic. On the one hand, he does not
>tell out and out lies; he is, however, somewhat selective in the facts
>he reveals, and is somewhat unbalanced.
>> Another NYTS guy horrified some of my friends in the Maryland
>> lodge by saying of Madame Blavatsky's Baboon, "No, I haven't
>> read it, and I have no intention of doing so. I've heard of
>> the negative attitude of the author."
> There is no obligation that all TS members read every book about the
>TS. My wife have both read MBB, but we wanted to be able to answer
>questions about it.
>> No doubt Peter
>> Washington has his own biases and is not particularly admiring
>> of HPB.
> Not to mention not letting facts get in the way of a sardonic barb...
>> theosophical subjects) of the decade. It's disappointing that
>> a national TS leader would boycott it because he thought it
> Not all the members of the NYTS are national TS leaders.
> Bart Lidofsky
Several months ago, I posted a msg inquiring if any one has seen any critque
of Tillett wherein any factual errors in his books were identified. I did
not get any response.
Again I think if factual errors are there, then all of us should know so
that they can be taken into consideration when evaluating or forming our own
opinion about the book.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application