Theos-Talk Archives (January 2008 Message tt00038)

John,
well, dyslexic would make you an Adyar theosophist in good standing!:-))

I fear that also de Zirkoff was no relative of Blavatsky, see:
http://www.theosophycanada.com/fohat_HPB_Geneology.html

That the myth about de Zirkoff is repeated since decaded and is copied out 
from credulous writer to the next is no proof that the myth is true.

High time that theosophy is dealt more in a scientific fashion (at times 
when science isn't anymore science).
Frank

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Augoeides-222@comcast.net
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: 7-years test for discipleship


Frank,
Thanks, your right! I am dyslexic! I don't think people can make out the 
more complete picture between Barborka and De Zirkoff and get them 
transposed in my memory. de Zirkoff was grand nephew of Blavatsky not 
Barborka. Notwithstanding my dyslexia between them what I posted about Tibet 
and Tulku I stand by. I think members cannot get a more complete picture of 
what transpired in Madame Blavatsky's life and what made her what she 
presented to those who knew her.

Regards,
John

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "Frank Reitemeyer" <dzyan@online.de>

>It is a real shame so many have not read and deeply studied the contents of
>Tibet and Tulku by her blood relative Barborka as this is the only solitary
>work that deals extensively with the matters that made Blavatsky so very
>unique. Understanding is found in those pages!

John, yes, it is a shame that theosophists do not their homework and study
our standard literature.
But since when is Barborka a blood relative of Blavatsky???
Frank

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]