Theos-Talk Archives (February 1997 Message tl00551)

TR
>This is why I am a little wary of a few of Sinnetts letters
>which he claims come from the Masters - especially the later
>ones. Like K. Paul Johnson, I think we should keep our eyes open
>when reading things attributed to the Masters and I applaud his
>scholarship. Unlike Paul, I do happen to believe M, KH et al.
>really existed.

JHE
Which letters are you weary of?  Why?  I think K Paul Johnson is
saying that M and KH did exist.  The question he raises is, who
were they?

JHE
>> Rather, I believe that the vast majority of
>> TS members are ignorant of HPB's writings, and I would say the
>> majority of the management too.

TR
>Astonishing, but I'd believe it. There seems to be a movement
>these days away from reading the classics in a field. When I
>studied Jung, for instance, most of my class mates read from
>Jungians, not Jung. I have nothing against reading Jungians.
>Certainly depth psychology did not stop with Jung, but why
>disregard the luminaries that brought the first and often most
>vital impulse in a new field?

JHE
Precisely the argument I have been making for the last twenty
years.  How can we get the management to hear it?