Theos-Talk Archives (September 1998 Message tt00172)

Sept 11th 1998

Dallas offers::

In several places the Masters, writing to Mr. Sinnett show that
They have their rules and limitations as to how much they can
interfere and use their "powers" in making adjustments and
framing the progress of the Theosophical Movement and the
Literature that they provided for study through HPB.

I use the 1923 Edition of ML for these page references:

They indicate that their rules were framed aeons ago, and could
not be broken.
[ see ML pp. 8-9, 18-19, 376, 446-7, 458,  Theosophist V. 2, pp
180-4, ]

They indicate that the students and those who work with humanity
have to make the best use they can of the help offered.  In other
words Karma operates.  There is the Karma of the race at the time
of re-promulgation.  Karma of the Messengers. And, the Karma of
those who are attracted to work closely with the Messengers at
that time.	[ See ML 203, 10, 34-5, 263, 368, 257, 296, 325, 484,
328-9, - How HPB was selected, and the desperate situation under
which the work was to be done, and the vicissitudes of the
passing times and work.  Pp. 310-17, 376, 446-7, 458, ]

I would say that much of what is written in ML is almost
incomprehensible to us in the West, where the traditions of the
Mystery and Occult Schools has been banished for over 1500 years.

The chela has to become an Adept through his own efforts  p. 144

The Teacher takes on the karma of the pupil: failure or success,
p. 284.

The chela should never ask for anything,  p.  337.

The Work of the Mahatmas:  pp. 51-3, 180-1, 385.

Apparently the work of editing and issuing the S D fell fully on
HPB and her assistants.  The Keightleys and Mead have written on
their part in this.  The Masters provided the material in many
cases (as Dr. Hubbe-Schlieden and Col. Olcott have noted) and
from then on it was up to HPB to put it into something that could
be published.

So what is the purpose of accusing the Masters of carelessness or
of assuming that all the "errors" in ISIS, the SD, and various
Articles are evidence for assumed carelessness ?  Could we have
done better ?

Dallas

> From: Bazzer
> Sent:	Friday, September 11, 1998 11:18 AM
> Subject: Re: There are no mistakes/errors/typos in HPB's 1888 edition of THE SECRET DOCTRINE??

Daniel,

Consider the following extract from "The Letters of H P Blavatsky
to A P
Sinnett":

"There are more secrets of initiation given out in the
*Introductory* Chapt.
than in *all* Isis.  And what comes after is still more
interesting.  But I
am utterly miserable about its *mechanical* arrangement.  I have
written and
re-written about twenty times this blessed Chapt.  I have cut off
and
shifted the paras: and passages and sections and sub-sections
until I am
sick of it".

Why the MECHANICAL arrangement?  Why put poor HPB through such
painstaking,
"utterly miserable", until she is "sick of it", work cutting,
shifting,
arranging paragraphs/passages/sections? Why so? Why is the
*mechanical*
arrangement so important?  Why?

> Paul, you even suggest that the Mahatmas were watching,
supervising and
> correcting the typesetting of THE SECRET DOCTRINE.

This is exactly what was said (cut 'n paste):

"It is said that Masters 'corrected' MSS during the night etc..
Do we think
They were any less capable, would have been any less active,
during the
typographic settings for the original print run?  Would They have
wasted
valuable time/energy/occult power 'correcting' hand
written/precipitated MSS
only to allow failings/errors to creep in during the type set?
Hardly makes
sense."

> Thanking you in advance for your explicit replies.

There is really nothing much else to add (explicit or otherwise).
People on
the list are free to decide/think as they wish - which is how it
should be.

Let us drop the matter and move on.

Kindest regards,
Paul.