Theos-Talk Archives (January 2008 Message tt00062)

Frank,
  You are completely aware of exactly what I mean by established history. And no I never engage  in silly juvenile debates with anyone in case you haven't noticed that in the last 8 years. H.P.B. will always remain who she is, was in spite of the dissatisfaction of others. I don't think she is related to the Monarchy of England either even though Hahn is on the Gate to the Place there. I had a friend named Hahn also years ago he was allegedly descended from the German Hahn and alleged Hahn Castle some where on the Rhine River. My interest is in what is read in Tibet and Tulku pages 143-44. confine it to that content please.
John


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

John, if you prefer "established history" - could you please explain my 
where I can find it?
Any names? Books?
Who and what is established?
And has established history declared that Boris de Zirkoff is a "blood 
relative" (your term) of Blavatsky?
Could you give me the source?

So far I can see Prof. Laur is the first researcher on Blavatsky's genealogy 
who sticks not only on hearsay.
And so far as I know no professional historian has researched on that topic 
the last hundred years, at least no findings - positive or negative - are 
known.

Or shall I understand your remark in that way, that copying out hearsay is 
"established history", while claiming for sources is nonserious?
What does the term "established history" in theosophical connection mean?
Is it the opposite of what Mahatma K.H. in "Five years of Theosophy" wrote, 
when he mentioned "license history"?

Do you come in your theosophical study to results in opposition to K.H.?
A rationale, please.
Frank

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Augoeides-222@comcast.net
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 11:55 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: 7-years test for discipleship

Frank,
To be perfectly honest I'm not the least interested in arguments to prove 
Germanic Purity of anyone's genealogy. Most if not all of Dr Laur's 
arguments I have never seen anywhere except by him and it seems he is quite 
biased about "German" origin of Hahn, who really cares?

I prefer the established History that I have read thank you.

Regards,
John

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

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]

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


 

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