Theos-Talk Archives (March 2001 Message tt00170)

Saturday, March 31, 2001

Dear Daniel:

Writing and thinking entirely for myself, let me say to you:

1, I would prefer an exact copy of the original, photographic if
available. [I have these in my personal library, also the
original Magazines.]

2. I do not limit myself to those, nor do I condemn the
existence of edited copies, providing the Editors of such
altered editions have first warned the readers that those are NOT
exact copies of the ORIGINALS, and if the CHANGES have not been
carefully marked and explained by footnoted on the pages where
they were inserted.

3. But if those are not available, then I would content myself
with a verbatim reprint (one that I have checked out myself with
the original. ].

4. But when I find that a good and clear copy of the original
exists, and it is expedient to use that, then I do use it.. I
also have some of these in my library for ready reference

However (and without inviting any further controversy), my
preferences do not preclude the using and owning of the several
variants, if the differences have been carefully noted and
precautions taken to insure that their differences are made
historically clear. I have tried to do this for my own
satisfaction.

My search for wisdom is heterodox. So is Theosophy, from a survey
of its literature. It culls facts and wisdom from all sources,
then, compares and provides an analysis of the basic concepts
which are found. Essentially it bases itself on universal and
impersonal data, history and information, and it appeals to the
sense of a universal and all-encompassing set of Laws and LAW
which pervades all things. Further it permits its students to
determine their own line of research, and urges them to mutually
compare their findings to determine what is more accurate in the
endless pursuit of TRUTH.

However, in seeking for a certain exactitude in the matter of
Theosophical explanations and doctrines, my preference has always
been to base myself, whenever possible, on the ORIGINAL EDITIONS
(or their photographic copies). I am not orthodox to the extent
of insisting that others use or follow my methods and criteria.

I believe that Theosophy is unique in inviting all who approach
it, and to learn from it, to adopt no "authority." It recommends
that each student be his own "authority" in the final analysis.
I find this to be in line with the concept that each one has to
win their own "perfection" in any particular stage of evolution
before they are able to pass on to another. On page 231 of
H.P.B.'s KEY TO THEOSOPHY we are given 4 "golden links" to the
basic chain on which theosophical doctrines are established.

As far as I can say, and speaking entirely for myself, I do not
establish nor do I demand any orthodoxy. If someone desires an
"edited" version of a Theosophical text, they are welcome to use
it, provided they are made aware from the beginning of the
inclusion of such variations as might alter substantially the
original teachings. Each one has to be left free.

To my mind it is important that H.P.B.'s and the Master's work be
kept available in as clear and accurate manner as possible.

Best wishes,

Dallas

=======================================


-----Original Message-----
From: Blavatsky Archives [mailto:info@blavatskyarchives.com]
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 5:01 PM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com; basic@blavatsky.net
Subject: Theos-World Original Writings of Madame Blavatsky --Part
I


Dear Dallas and John (Compiler),

Thank you for your emails concerning
HPB's original writings.

Let me clearly state my view about
HPB's original books and articles.

When I study HPB's writings I prefer
to read her original writings as they
were published during her lifetime.

The main reason for this is that after
HPB's death various persons have edited
her writings making various changes, deletions
and additions. Some of the changes have been
minor and trivial. But some of the changes
have been major and some of these changes
and "corrections" have actually been wrong.
The changes are usually not noted therefore
the reader of these new editions has no easy
way to know what has been changed.

Dallas, I believe you have expressed a similar
view in the past. John, I don't know your view
of this subject.

But I ask both of you:

Which would you honestly prefer: (1) a photographic
facsimile of one of HPB's originals writings as it
was published during her lifetime or (2) a later
edition of her book where her text has been edited, either
by deletions, changes or additions?

For example, take ISIS UNVEILED, I prefer to use the
photographic facsimile of the original edition
reprinted by the Theosophy Company. By saying that,
I don't mean that the editions currently published
by Theosophical University Press or Theosophical Publishing
house are worthless. I ALSO use those editions for various
purposes but I prefer using the photographic facsimile
of the original for my primary study of that text.

The same applies to THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE. I prefer to
use as my primary source the photographic facsimile of
the VOICE published by Kessinger. The other editions of the
VOICE published by Theosophy Company, Theosophical Publishing
House and Theosophical University Press also have value but they
are not photographic facsimiles of the original 1889 edition.

I could go down the whole list of HPB's works.

So if you had your choice, what edition (original) or (later
edited)
(see above) would the two of you choose?

Daniel

---------------------------------------
Daniel H. Caldwell
info@blavatskyarchives.com

CUT