FOR CALDWELL TO COMMENT
Jan 07, 2007 11:14 AM
Caldwell writes below:
"And I would think that Mr. Carlos Aveline who apparently portrays
himself as a great defender of Madame Blavatsky and the Masters..."
Caldwell is wrong here. It is obvious that I am but practicing
English as a second language while sharing a few ideas with friends.
Mr. Caldwell goes on to say that I should:
"... Show MORE INTEREST in correcting the misleading ideas promoted
in Johnson's books than in combatting my efforts to promote HPB and
the Masters. Unfortunately, Mr. Aveline devotes 1000 times more
effort in combatting my Blavatsky work than combatting the
misleading ideas found in Mr. Johnson's work and books which are to
be found in hundreds of libraries in the world and available through
a major publisher and Amazon.com, etc."
To this, I say:
D. Caldwell, "D. Green" and J. Algeo promoted Paul Johnson within
the theosophical movement, used him and his books for their own
Loyolian "political" purposes and them "discarded" him. This is a
cold-blooded form manipulation of misinformed people. This sort of
method has nothing to do with "Blavatsky" or Theosophy, but is
familiar to the Society of Jesus and Opus Dei. Just as slanders of
all kinds against anyone who opposes them -- conveniently made
under "alternative names" -- are, too.
One who did not infiltrate the theosophical movement does no harm
to it. People at large are invited to believe HPB or not, and to
write whatever they like. Infiltrating to slander from within while
using false names is quite another, and Jesuitic, thing. Actually,
Johnson has done the movement a favour when he unmasked "Mr. Green"
and some of the other false identities used by our Loyolian
brother, Mr. Daniel Caldwell.
Caldwell is not doing "Blavatsky work". H. P. Blavastky never
personalized the movement. She was not a follower of herself,
to "Blavatsky", and did not want anyone to follow her blindly. HPB
was loyal to the CAUSE. It is the job of traitors and Jesuits to
turn things personal. Jesuits transform Christianism in a personal
following to Jesus, just as Daniel Caldwell wants to transform the
whole issue of Theosophy in something limited to "Blavatsky". That
is perhaps why his Archives are not called "Theosophy Archives
Online". His project is to get Theosophy transferred down to the
level of mere personalism, and hence gossips and slanders. In
that, too, Mr. Crosbie was right: personalities are the blank of
Jesuits and traitors. Instead of seeing a philosophy, they talk
about personality names. Yet no truth seeker will go very far if he
is not attacked at his personality level. This is in the "Mahatma
Letters" too, and it is part of his occult training. The important
thing, then, is that Daniel is not doing any "HPB work". She had
respect for esoteric tradition and he hasn't. She fought her
slanderers and he promotes them. She supported the movement and he
fights it using false identities and sowing dissension. And so on.
I hope this helps Mr. Caldwell and his "various personalities"
understand things a little.
Best regards, Carlos.
--- In email@example.com, "danielhcaldwell"
> Let me just take one of Paul Johnson's
> comments about me and look at it in some
> detail to see if there is any substance to it.
> Paul Johnson once wrote about me:
> I have been the most frequent "beneficiary"
> of such treatment from Caldwell, who has delighted in stirring up
> fundamentalist Theosophists into rage against my books.
> In this one sentence written by Mr. Johnson, there are alot
> of assumptions!! These appear to be:
> (1) I was delighted....
> (2) My intent was aimed at "fundamentalist Theosophists".
> (3) I wanted to create a "rage" against his books.
> etc. etc.
> Look at all of his assumptions...one piled on top of another.
> I ask readers: isn't all of the above simply an example of Mr.
> Johnson's projecting his own ideas on to what I was doing? I
> actually don't know where he got these ideas from...maybe from
> the "ether"! But they certainly don't reflect what I was doing or
> In my published essays and in my postings on Theos-Talk, etc., I
> always tried to deal with the substance of his statements, thesis,
> assertions, etc. concerning HPB's Masters.
> See my essays at:
> Apparently Mr. Johnson was more interested in talking about me
> in discussing or elucidating his own ideas about HPB's Masters.
> My sole interest was in Mr. Johnson's books and his statements
> therein about HPB and the Masters. But for reasons best known to
> Johnson he wanted to change the subject to me.
> See my essays at <http://blavatskyarchives.com/johnson.htm>, that
> the focus on my interest and attention and to this day I could
> less about Mr. Johnson himself. I have no interest in him or his
> psychology, his motives, etc. But his books are still out there
> available and to this day I receive from time to time inquiries
> readers asking for input about his books and the statements he
> about the Masters.
> And I would think that Mr. Carlos Aveline who apparently portrays
> himself as a great defender of Madame Blavatsky and the Masters
> show MORE INTEREST in correcting the misleading ideas promoted in
> Johnson's books than in combatting my efforts to promote HPB and
> Masters. Unfortunately, Mr. Aveline devotes 1000 times more
> in combatting my Blavatsky work than combatting the misleading
> found in Mr. Johnson's work and books which are to be found in
> hundreds of libraries in the world and available through a major
> publisher and Amazon.com, etc.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application