Sergey at 12:10, 28 March 2026

2026-03-28T12:10:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:10, 28 March 2026
Line 8:		Line 8:
	\| previous = Blavatsky H.P. - Buddhism Through Christian Spectacles		\| previous = Blavatsky H.P. - Buddhism Through Christian Spectacles
	\| next = Blavatsky H.P. - Professor Elliott Coues and Koot Hoomi		\| next = Blavatsky H.P. - Professor Elliott Coues and Koot Hoomi
	\| alternatives = ~~[https://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v11/y1889_030.htm KH]~~		\| alternatives =
	\| translations =		\| translations =
	}}		}}
Line 17:		Line 17:
	{{Vertical space\|}}		{{Vertical space\|}}

	<center>[Lucifer, Vol. IV, No. 21, May, 1889, pp. 250, 261]~~</center>~~		{{HPB-CW-comment\|view=center\|[''Lucifer'', Vol. IV, No. 21, May, 1889, pp. 250, 261]}}
	{{Vertical space\|}}		{{Vertical space\|}}

	{{HPB-CW-comment\|[In relation to objections raised against alleged Theosophical assertions; the argument being as follows: “You postulate your principles a priori, hence you make them arbitrary. Starting from this, you deduce your conclusions which, supposing them to be strictly logical, have yet no scientific value, since they err by their very basis.” To this H.P.B. remarks:]}}		{{Style P-Quote\|{{HPB-CW-comment\|[In relation to objections raised against alleged Theosophical assertions; the argument being as follows: “You postulate your principles ''a priori'', hence you make them arbitrary. Starting from this, you deduce your conclusions which, supposing them to be strictly logical, have yet no scientific value, since they err by their very basis.” To this H.P.B. remarks:]}}}}

	We strongly suspect this method of being precisely that of orthodox science, and not at all the theosophical. While their conclusions are always strictly correct and logical, their major premise is generally a hypothesis, and often not true in nature. The syllogisms of science run somewhat in this manner:		We strongly suspect this method of being precisely that of orthodox science, and not at all the theosophical. While their conclusions are always strictly correct and logical, their major premise is generally a hypothesis, and often not true in nature. The syllogisms of science run somewhat in this manner:

	The catarrhine ape is dumb, and lost its tail (Haeckel); Speech arose from crude animal sounds, and early man had a tail (Darwin).		The catarrhine ape is dumb, and lost its tail (''Haeckel''); Speech arose from crude animal sounds, and early man had a tail (''Darwin'').

	Therefore, the two had a common ancestor.		''Therefore, the two had a common ancestor''.

	It is for the Darwino-Haeckelians, evidently, that it has been said that, “If the premises are not true and the syllogism is regular, the reason is valid, and the conclusion, whether true or false, is correctly derived.”		It is for the ''Darwino-Haeckelians'', evidently, that it has been said that, “If the premises are not true and the syllogism is regular, the reason is valid, and the conclusion, ''whether true or false, is correctly derived''.”

	{{HPB-CW-separator}}		{{HPB-CW-separator}}

	{{HPB-CW-comment\|[On the “sterile efforts to determine the attributes of God, which would amount to seeking to define the infinite.”]}}		{{Style P-Quote\|{{HPB-CW-comment\|[On the “sterile efforts to determine the attributes of God, which would amount to seeking to define the infinite.”]}}}}

	Leaving aside that trifling difficulty in philosophy, which shows to us that to postulate attributes, which are by their very nature finite, to the infinite, is like trying to square the circle.		Leaving aside that trifling difficulty in philosophy, which shows to us that to postulate attributes, which are by their very nature ''finite'', to the ''infinite'', is like trying to square the circle.

	{{Page aside\|210}}		{{Page aside\|210}}
	{{HPB-CW-comment\|[Concerning people, mostly in rural Russia, who can “talk away” very effectually all sorts of ailments.]}}		{{Style P-Quote\|{{HPB-CW-comment\|[Concerning people, mostly in rural Russia, who can “talk away” very effectually all sorts of ailments.]}}}}

	This is the literal translation of the popular and mystic term ~~“Zagovarivat’~~,” in Russia. For the good men and women in towns and villages who play at local medicine-men (and the people will have no others) literally “talk away,” by means of some strange words which no one understands but themselves, and by breathing on the water, all kinds of diseases and ailments most effectively.		This is the literal translation of the popular and mystic term “''Zagovarivat''’,” in Russia. For the good men and women in towns and villages who play at local medicine-men (and the people ''will'' have no others) literally “talk away,” by means of some strange words which no one understands but themselves, and by breathing on the water, all kinds of diseases and ailments most effectively.

Sergey: Created page with "{{HPB-CW-header | item title = Miscellaneous Notes | item author = Blavatsky H.P. | volume = 11 | pages = 209-210 | publications = Lucifer, Vol. IV, No. 2..."

2024-04-28T15:34:22Z

Created page with "{{HPB-CW-header | item title = Miscellaneous Notes | item author = Blavatsky H.P. | volume = 11 | pages = 209-210 | publications = Lucifer, Vol. IV, No. 2..."

New page

{{HPB-CW-header
| item title = Miscellaneous Notes
| item author = Blavatsky H.P.
| volume = 11
| pages = 209-210
| publications = Lucifer, Vol. IV, No. 21, May, 1889, pp. 250, 261
| scrapbook =
| previous = Blavatsky H.P. - Buddhism Through Christian Spectacles
| next = Blavatsky H.P. - Professor Elliott Coues and Koot Hoomi
| alternatives = [https://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v11/y1889_030.htm KH]
| translations =
}}

{{Page aside|209}}

{{Style P-Title|MISCELLANEOUS NOTES}}
{{Vertical space|}}

<center>[Lucifer, Vol. IV, No. 21, May, 1889, pp. 250, 261]</center>
{{Vertical space|}}

{{HPB-CW-comment|[In relation to objections raised against alleged Theosophical assertions; the argument being as follows: “You postulate your principles a priori, hence you make them arbitrary. Starting from this, you deduce your conclusions which, supposing them to be strictly logical, have yet no scientific value, since they err by their very basis.” To this H.P.B. remarks:]}}

We strongly suspect this method of being precisely that of orthodox science, and not at all the theosophical. While their conclusions are always strictly correct and logical, their major premise is generally a hypothesis, and often not true in nature. The syllogisms of science run somewhat in this manner:

The catarrhine ape is dumb, and lost its tail (Haeckel); Speech arose from crude animal sounds, and early man had a tail (Darwin).

Therefore, the two had a common ancestor.

It is for the Darwino-Haeckelians, evidently, that it has been said that, “If the premises are not true and the syllogism is regular, the reason is valid, and the conclusion, whether true or false, is correctly derived.”

{{HPB-CW-separator}}

{{HPB-CW-comment|[On the “sterile efforts to determine the attributes of God, which would amount to seeking to define the infinite.”]}}

Leaving aside that trifling difficulty in philosophy, which shows to us that to postulate attributes, which are by their very nature finite, to the infinite, is like trying to square the circle.

{{Page aside|210}}
{{HPB-CW-comment|[Concerning people, mostly in rural Russia, who can “talk away” very effectually all sorts of ailments.]}}

This is the literal translation of the popular and mystic term “Zagovarivat’,” in Russia. For the good men and women in towns and villages who play at local medicine-men (and the people will have no others) literally “talk away,” by means of some strange words which no one understands but themselves, and by breathing on the water, all kinds of diseases and ailments most effectively.

Blavatsky H.P. - Miscellaneous Notes (52) - Revision history

Sergey at 12:10, 28 March 2026

Sergey: Created page with "{{HPB-CW-header | item title = Miscellaneous Notes | item author = Blavatsky H.P. | volume = 11 | pages = 209-210 | publications = Lucifer, Vol. IV, No. 2..."