Theos-Talk Archives (May 1998 Message tl00052)

According to theos-l@vnet.net:
Kay wrote:

> Hello mr. Johnson!
> 
> j> population, the ratio for India is .000012631; with 4,000 members
> j> out of 260 million in the US, the ratio here is .000015384,
> 
>  Note how much is overall amount of literal people in India and
> try to calculate the ratio for literal people respectively there &
> in the USA.

Those *are* literal totals.  Guess you mean "literate," and if you
exclude illiterate Indians from consideration you could claim
that the TS is more popular in India.  But the level of
"popularity" is still so tiny that I would think some European
countries would do better.
> 

snip
> 
>  As E.Roerich mentioned, those who deny a guru are regarded in India
> as a trees without roots. It seems to me that she wrote that about
> Aurobindo but in matches good for all folks of that kind.

Krishnamurti and Aurobindo are immensely popular and honored in
India, one sees their books in all the bookstores, so I don't
think they've been rejected at all as your quote would imply.  On
the other hand I don't recall ever running across Theosophy books
in stores.

>  BTW, "The voice of silence" was published in 1920s in China with
> approval of Panchen-lama. His opinion, as an official head of Gelug-pa
> might be appreciated even much that Dalai's. Only now when Panchen
> Rimpoche is imprisoned, the Dalai-lama is in fact the head of gelug-pa.

His opinion was that the doctrines in the text were genuine
Mahayana doctrines.  This has been consistently overinterpreted
to be a blanket endorsement of all HPB's claims about Tibet,
which of course it's not.  It's not even an endorsement of the
book as a genuine Tibetan source, just genuine Mahayana doctrine.
snip

> BTW, what's your purpose of refuting existance of the masters?

In America we call that a "When did you stop beating your wife?"
question, that is, one that presumes the guilt of the person
being asked the question, who can only answer honestly by
challenging the presumption.  I've never had any purpose to refute
the existence of any Masters, and have devoted three books to
demonstrating the historicity of HPB's in particular.

> Why not refute existance of Jesus Christ, Muhammad or Blavatsky herself?

You seem to have totally misunderstood my writings based on
second or third hand information.  Read something I've written
before attacking me, at least!

> I understand that TS imposes no one to believe in them and admits
> to join those who don't believe, but what's the use of joining
> and then publish the pamflets against masters?

I haven't published any pamphlets at all, and my books are *for*
not *against* Theosophy, HPB and the Masters.  They were
published many years after I joined the TSes, and were not a
project I decided to do but rather information I stumbled upon
while working on something quite different.

 Normally books are
> written for some doctrine, not against.

I'm not writing for or against a doctrine.  The books are
overwhelmingly investigations of history surrounding HPB.  That
the history I explore has some doctrinal implications is not a
matter of my own choice or preference.  Nor of much emphasis in
the books.

 There are some books against
> but they are really for another doctrine, for example, christian.
> Do you have a doctrine of your own?

No.  Well, we all do, but if you're asking if I wrote these out
of a belief system opposed to orthodox Theosophy, definitely not.
Rather, I wrote them while my own adherence to the literal,
traditional view of HPB's Masters was gradually lessening due to
the information I was unearthing.  Not due to any competing
influence; Theosophy was at the center of my life for almost 20
years.  That it is not so any longer is due to the reactions of
some Theosophists to my work and the urge to explore new literary
territory, which together led to a greater sense of affiliation with the
Cayce work than with theosophical groups.

 For people write books simply
> "against" most commonly for money or ambition. Are your books
> published by commercial publishing houses?

No, three by the State University of New York Press and one, the
first, self published.

>     Oh, perhaps I've guessed: these books are sold good, so it's
> the best way to obtain money for TS & publishing such books as S.D., etc... ;)

Are you going out of your way to be rude here?  First you have a
complete wrong understanding of what I've written, and then you
start making odd insinuations about my motives.  Is this a fit
way for theosophical discourse to proceed?

We should be here for discussion involving openness to evidence,
friendly camaraderie, willingness to learn and share.  If you
approach it as a place for argument based on win/lose
assumptions, belief that you have the truth and I am your
opponent to be attacked, then we don't have a meeting of minds.

Cheers,
Paul