Jun 08, 1998 06:57 AM
by K. Paul Johnson
According to email@example.com:
> OK. "K" before "Paul" has misleaded me, I thought that it's
> an abbreviation of the first name which is unknown to me.
I don't use it, but there's a Paul Johnson with many more books,
and better known ones, than I so I needed to insert the initial
so avoid confusion. It's Kenneth.
> If there was any "prototype", especially several of them, but not a
> full match, consequently Morya was imaginary person invented by HPB.
As I stated on another list, I won't debate my books about HPB
publicly any more, since the hypotheses have been in print over 7
years now and my new book about Cayce is just about to appear.
That's really my main interest now. If you want to discuss by
private email that's fine. Here, I'll just say that "imaginary
person" does not seem to have the same meaning for you that it
does for me.
> p> I would not say that "Morya" and Ranbir Singh are the
> p> same person, because "Morya" is a literary character.
> So why can't we regard your books as "anti-HPB"?
People can regard any books in any way they choose. But it would
not be accurate to regard these particular books as "anti-HPB"
which would be apparent if you were to read them. They are
generally quite friendly to her, just not worshipful.
> If she described Morya in her books, it would be "literary character",
> but when she presents the letters & phenomena as coming from Morya,
> it isn't a liteature, it's a humbug.
The world is not such a black and white place in my estimation.
If she entered yogic states where she believed herself in
communion with her teachers, and wrote what she believed was
their messages for them, does her misleading description of those
teachers make the whole thing a "humbug"? Not in the sense that
Hodgson meant it.
> p> Rather, I'd say that Morya is based primarily on Ranbir, with
> p> other elements from other historical acquaintances of HPB, and
> HPB herself describes maharaja of Kashmir. Maybe she mispresented
> him, I don't know, but anyway she doesn't pay to him much respect.
You've read The Durbar in Lahore. There are other references to
him in Theosophical literature, that are more respectful of him.
Especially Old Diary Leaves.
Now, I have to say that it is foolish to try to defend books that
the person criticizing them has not read, so if you wish to
continue to discuss with me about them a)please read them first
and b) then make it a private rather than public interrogation.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application