Re: Theos-World WHAT WERE THEY MASTERS OF ? PART II
- But these "assertions" are not necessarily attributable to HPB or the so
called Masters. What has the beliefs or assertions of later leaders of the
TS, or interpretations of post Blavatsky theosophical writers have to do with
the original theosophical teachings themselves? To confuse the original
teachings of Theosophy or the aims and purposes of the Theosophical Movement
with the Theosophical Society (TS) -- and use such "evidence" as a basis of
argument against the validity of the teachings of HPB and the Masters -- is
actually setting up a "straw man."
In a message dated 11/20/02 5:51:04 AM, bhakti.eohn@... writes:
>WHAT ARGUMENT ? WHAT 'STRAW MAN' ? PROPOSTION # 1. BELOW IS A
>STATEMENT OF ASSERTIONS FOUND IN THEOSOPHICAL SOURCES THEMSELVES.
>--- In theos-talk@y..., Bart Lidofsky <bartl@s...> wrote:
>> Bhakti Ananda Goswami wrote:
>> > WHAT WERE THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY MASTERS THE MASTERS OF ?
>> A body of knowledge.
>> > THEOSOPHICAL PROPOSITIONS
>> > 1. THE ONLY TRUE PHILOSOPHY OF THE EARTH, THEOSOPHY IDENTIFIED AS
>> > BUDDHISM, IS FOUND IN THE MAHATMAS' LETTERS, AND THESE LETTERS ARE
>> > THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF ESOTERIC / OCCULT OR HIGHER WISDOM FOR
>> > THEOSOPHISTS. NEXT TO THESE LETTERS, THE "STANZAS OF DYZAN" ARE
>> > CANONICAL IMPORTANCE TO THEOSOPHISTS.
>> Straw man argument. The rest of your message bcomes
>> Bart Lidofsky