Theos-Talk Archives (September 1998 Message tt00264)

[Rough Draft]

Tony,

Thanks for your various comments.

I now want to make a few comments on what Tony writes about reprints of
HPB's articles.  First Tony's comments, then mine.

Tony Maddock wrote:
> With SD, ISIS, KEY and VOICE OF THE SILENCE, would always recommend the
> facsimiles, and where it is possible, to read HPBs writings in the
> originals, as they have gone through a massive amount of editing.  The
> Theosophy Co (can't explain VofS) & Pasaden would seem to appreciate the
> importance of the originals, whereas the editor of the "Collected Writings"
> does not, in the sense that he felt it was correct for him to "correct" HPB
> and the Mahatmas.  It is a different agenda.
...........................................
> Also the "Collected Works" 4 vol. ed. are far more accurate to the originals
> than the "Collected Writings."  But some seem to think that the editor of
> the "Collected Writings," was more accurate than HPB.  It is something we
> all have to work out and decide for ourselves.


Daniel Caldwell replies:

When Tony writes as follows:

>The Theosophy Co (can't explain VofS). . . would seem to appreciate the >importance of the originals, whereas the editor of the "Collected >Writings" does not, in the sense that he felt it was correct for him to >"correct" HPB and the Mahatmas. . . .,

I am not so sure that the Theosophy Company *always* appreciates the
importance of the originals.  Their VOICE edition is one example.  ALSO
it is quite puzzling/baffling to me why in 1981 the Theosophy Company,
LA, decided to reprint A MODERN PANARION:  A Collection of Fugitive
Fragments from the pen of H.P. Blavatsky.  This volume was *first*
published in 1895 by The Theosophical Publishing Society, London.

Dallas TenBroeck has repeatedly pointed out that G.R.S. Mead and Annie
Besant heavily edited the 1893 edition of THE SECRET DOCTRINE.  The
U.L.T. in their 1925 history titled THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT 1875-1925
wrote:

"Any reader can compare the Original Edition of the 'Secret Doctrine'
with the Third and Revised Edition, edited by Mrs. Besant and Mr. Mead.
. . . the comparison will show *more than forty thousand changes* from
the text of the Original Edition, ranging all the way from mere
trivialities, through important alterations, to *deliberate suppression*
. . . . (p. 569)

As I have shown before, G.R.S. Mead was principally responsible for the
editing of this 1893 SD edition.

And I have reason to believe that G.R.S. Mead was ALSO responsible for
the editing of A MODERN PANARION.  Michael Gomes is also of this
opinion.

Therefore, have HPB's articles in A MODERN PANARION been subjected to
Mead's habit of "correcting", "altering" and "deleting"?

If one has access to HPB's orginal articles, one can answer this
question by simple COMPARISON.

In the very last article printed in MODERN PANARION, titled
"Reincarnation in Tibet", the first paragraph (p. 497) reads:

"So little is known by Europeans of what is going on in Tibet, and even
in the more accessible Bhutan, that an Anglo-Indian paper - one of those
which pretend to know, and certainly discuss every imaginable subject,
whether they really know anything of it or not - has actually come out
with the following scrap of valuable information:"

Turning to THE THEOSOPHIST, March 1882, p. 146, this paragraph reads:

"So little is known by Europeans of what is going on in Tibet, and even
in the more accessible Bhootan, that an Anglo-Indian paper, - one of
those which pretend to know, and certainly discuss every blessed
subject, whether they really know anything of it or not, - actually came
out with the following bit of valuable information: - "

I'm sure all readers can see THE differences.

Even Boris de Zirkoff's transcription of this paragraph in the
"Collected Writings" series is more accurate than this!

There are even more diffferences in the rest of the article, including
rearrangement of parts of sentences, etc.

The original article under consideration ends with these words from HPB:

"The little that can be given out will be found in a paper on the 'Holy
Lha' which we hope to publish in our next."

The editor of A MODERN PANARION has deleted this sentence.

On pp. 401-409 of A MODERN PANARION, one will find "The Six-Pointed and
Five-Pointed Stars."  Upon turning to the original publication of this
article in THE THEOSOPHIST, Nov, 1881, pp. 31-33, one finds that this
article has been heavily edited.  For example, the original 1881 article
has many words in italics and caps. Much of this has been changed in
MODERN PANARION. There is at least one deletion also. Etc. etc.

Now I must also say that many of the articles in MODERN PANARION have
only a minimum of editing.  But almost all of the articles (written by
HPB from 1874 to 1878) have different titles in MODERN PANARION.  The
original titles have been deleted and new titles "invented".

IMO, it is somewhat ironic that the ULT/Theosophy Company (which has
been very critical of G.R.S Mead's editing of the 1893 edition of the
SD) would decide to reprint, promote and sell MODERN PANARION!!  I would
have thought that some ULT associate on the TC publications committee
would have gone to the original articles of HPB and compared them with
what is published in A MODERN PANARION.  Just one hour of comparison
would have alerted the TC committee to what I have partially outlined in
this email.

I would suggest that the officials of the Theosophy Company might
reconsider their position in selling a volume of HPB's articles which
have been "edited" (heavily in some parts) by G.R.S. Mead.