Daniel:

There must be some confusion here. I have repeatedly
argued that:

(1) The masters were real men, whose worldly
identities were concealed with the pseudonyms KH,
which was for sure a pseudonym, and M, which was
probably a pseudonyn,

(2) the WB was a real organization, based on northern
India which may or may not still exist,

(3) The MS quoted in the SD were real MS kept in a
library maintained by a member of the WB,

(4) The thesis developed in the SD was the work of the
WB, and not the unassisted production of HPB,

(5) HPB did in fact use botanical substances, as she
said herself, and her masters did as well, as she
says, and Olcott's Ootan Liatto experience is
explicable in terms of herbs burned by Ootan Liatto
and his companion in Olcott's presence,

(6) The mahatma letters were written by HPB and
Damodar and palmed off on people in a way made to
appear mysterious, except in a few cases.

(7) The rest of the phenomena have to be judged on a
case by case basis, but most of them are not
scientific evidence, even though all of them might
have neen miraculous for all I know. It is therefore
good historical technique to focus on the strong
stories and ignore the weak ones.

Steve

--- danielhcaldwell <danielhcaldwell@...> wrote:
> Some of the readers on this forum may find the
> following of some
> interest:
>
> "COMPARING and CONTRASTING Some of the Different
> Interpretations
> about Blavatsky's Masters"
>
> by Daniel H. Caldwell
>
> See:
>
>
http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/caldwellcomparing.htm
>
> Daniel H. Caldwell
> BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
> http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/introduction.htm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions!
http://auctions.yahoo.com