Theos-Talk Archives (October 2006 Message tt00107)

Jake,

You write:

>      He [Dan] also claims support for the 
> bonafides of the imaginary "letter" by 
> the number of people who were fooled by 
> it and quoted portions, or what not.  It 
> doen't matter how many people were fooled.  
> If they were fooled, they're fooled!  I 
> notice in the latest Fohat, McDonald 
> quotes the E.S. Instruction 5 portion 
> of this letter on concentration on the 
> "masters living image" (just another 
> meat-puppet image!) - but he infers that 
> it must be a metaphor for the higher self.  
> Well, MacDonald is fooled also, but just 
> not as much.  Why would a teacher go to
> such a misleading pretext? - causing harm
> if misunderstood?

Well, Jake, in what you write above as your argument, you are 
ASSUMING that they (including McDonald) were FOOLED!

But maybe you are the one who is FOOLED.....

I assume somebody is fooled or ... wrong....but who is it???

I even got the impression from what Ken Small wrote that he believes 
in the reality of the letter....oh but I forgot...he is fooled too! 
so I can't count him!!  :)

As I said previously, once I had some reservations about the 
letter... but in light of various material...some of which I have 
presented here... I have less reservations....

And yes I would like to see the original.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc