Theos-Talk Archives (November 2001 Message tt00537)

Paul Johnson during the interview I did with him Jan./Febr. 2000 
stated: "HPB was a hanger-on, an arriviste, and a raconteur con-woman 
who managed to attach herself to some of the best informed, best 
connected men of her time. But these men weren't all members of any 
fraternity and they sure as hell didn't send her anywhere or give her 
any messages. Individual groups at various times used her services, 
but she rewrote her story to make it continuous and logical when it 
was neither. Her projection of her own strengths onto male fantasy 
figures was a symptom of the period's view of women. That is she had 
to pretend that everything she did and wrote was directed by men, 
because otherwise she was "just a women". We can not take her 
seriously in terms of having any fixed principles or deep seated 
loyalties. She's constantly reinventing herself. But the things she 
says from "within" a newly-invented self are perfectly sincere for 
the time being.

The conclusion Brendan comes to in his Dr. Thesis is that:" There can 
be little doubt that Blavatsky mined the experience of such men as 
Rawson and Sotheran in her quest for an occult synthesis. In this 
latter, she would subsequently prove to be , gifteded with remarkable 
recall and able to synthesise any number of seemingly disparate 
streams of information into her overarching systematising of esoteric 
lore. In the early 1870s, , it appears that Blavatsky was intent upon 
immersing herself in the myriad esotericisms of her era, with the 
objective, perhaps, of eventually establishing her own occult 
organisation. If an idealised speculative Freemasonry, mediated to 
Blavatsky by mythopÏic Masonic entrepreneurs, provided the model for 
her regarding a society of esotericists, then the ground had been 
more than amply fertilised by her experiences of Spiritualism.
She understood that adherents of both Freemasonry and Spiritualism 
were earnestly seeking a satisfying occult worldview - and that it 
would be from these that she could form the nucleus of her new 
collegium Blavatsky was a collector, receiving and classifying 
information in an order idiosyncratic to herself, and, until her 
publications of the late 1870s at the earliest, it is often unclear 
exactly what policy governed her acquisitions."

When the Masters made history into mythology, and mythology 
into history, they became none other than Harlequin - in a turban. 
There is no need to search for Oriental Bodhisattvas when Blavatsky's 
Hermesian modelling is fully acknowledged." 
 
The evidence for the above can be seen in following links. But Daniel 
Caldwell hass never as much as with one word commented on these:

http://www.geocities.com/rewaldsen/blavsynthesis.html

http://www.geocities.com/rewaldsen/mastershbp3.html

http://www.geocities.com/rewaldsen/angelicmaster.html

http://www.geocities.com/rewaldsen/finalyears.html

http://www.geocities.com/rewaldsen/rosicrucianm.html
Brigitte.