Re: re St Germain , Casanova,
Apr 17, 2004 06:58 AM
--- In email@example.com, Mauri <mhart@i...> wrote:
> Casanova's story seems
> kind of one sided to me about St G.
> Aren't there any positive stories that
> might tend to be supportive of St G
If you read it and take care to distinguishe between fact and opinion
I think you will agree his account is quite valuable. He draws an
excellent porttait of St. G and the only thing he says that is not
positive is that he considered St. G. to be a fellow impostor. Given
the kinds of claims St. G was making and given that Casanona was
working the same rackets, it is inevitable that he would have reached
that conclusion. That he was a trader in dyes and jewels, that he
was a great conversationalist, that he ate nothing in the presence of
others, etc., is, I suspect, all true. And none of that is negative.
One thing that distinguishes St. G. from Cagliostro is that St. G.
never seemed to teach anything of a metaphysical nature. Unless you
consider making diamonds to be metaphysical he also never
demonstrated anything, except for claims that he was personally
present at the Council of Trent, etc., which are untestable claims.
Given that he was interviewed by German Rosicrucians and determined
not to be a metaphysical person, I tend to wonder if some of the
claims made by Cooper-Oakley and other have been a bit over
enthusiastic. If he had really been a predecessor of HPB one would
expect he would have founded a lodge, or joined one of the many
organizations that existed in Europe then. So far as I know, no
claim has ever been made that he did so.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application