Theos-Talk Archives (February 2002 Message tt00170)

Dear Steve,

Thanks for your posting at: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/5036 

I gather from what you write that you are in complete agreement with 
K. Paul Johnson that in the Ooton Liatto Case two "physically present 
people [were] conversing with Olcott....". [see Case A at 
http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/olcottsevenaccounts.htm ]

In other words, you maintain that the two men in Olcott's apartment 
were NOT imaginary figments of Olcott's hallucination but real flesh 
and blood human beings. I also assume you agree with Johnson that 
these two men were ADEPTS. 

Steve, am I right in what I write above?

Moving to the next related issue.

>From what you have written at 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/5036 , may we safely 
assume that you also accept "at face value" the other cases cited at:

http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/olcottsevenaccounts.htm 

For example, in Cases B, C and F, Olcott reports that his Master 
[Morya] came to visit and talk with him. In light of what you have 
written, I am assuming that you accept that a real physical person 
came to visit Olcott on each of these occasions. And furthermore 
that this person was Blavatsky's Master who used the pseudonym M. Am 
I right in making these assumptions?

One more example: In Case D, Olcott testified he saw "one of the 
Masters" at the Golden Temple in Amritsar. Do you accept that a real 
flesh and blood man gave HPB and Olcott each a rose? 

Thanking you in advance for your further input and clarification of 
your position. 

Daniel H. Caldwell
BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/introduction.htm