Theos-Talk Archives (July 2001 Message tt00247)

Tuesday, July 24, 2001


Re: Reprints by THEOSOPHY COMPANY of original
Theosophical Literature

1. MODERN PANARION
(H.P.B.)
2. The VOICE OF THE
SILENCE (HPB)


Dear Daniel:

It is kind of your to reproduce again your side of a debate which
we held some time back on several books issued by THEOSOPHY
COMPANY. Also, you already know that I have approached them with
a view to securing what information is available concerning the
editions originally used, and I have sent what I secured on to
you. It is strange that you have not reproduced the relevant
parts of it in your letter. I am sure that in your anxiety to be
fair, you might have reproduced what I have already communicated
to you?

I acknowledge we are looking back over long periods of time when
editors and those who were first responsible for the books when
they were reproduced are no longer here to answer you directly.
In that I am equally at sea, and can only make guesses. You may
have found other documentary support than I have? If so, do
publish it. It will benefit us all.


1. THE MODERN PANARION, was recently reissued by
THEOSOPHY COMPANY, Los Angeles, as a photographic reprint of the
original 1895 edition. And it is like the book that was issued
(changes from the original articles included) in 1895 by the
Theosophical Publishing House London, New York and Madras.

We both have verified that the original book (as a book) differs
from the original articles. Strange as this will seem, I believe
that only an answer from Mrs. Annie Besant, who at that time
sanctioned the printing of that book, would satisfy us both.
Perhaps she had it reedited, or did it herself, I have not seen
any documentation on that. Anything I might say would be
speculative.

2. The VOICE OF THE SILENCE (HPB). The edition that
THEOSOPHY COMPANY issued is a copy of Mr. Judge's printing of
this book in New York in 1893. { It is not 100% verbatim, as we
found some references (not the TEXT) had been corrected, perhaps
by Mr. Judge.} I wrote you that I have seen several copies of
this New York 1893 original .

I also wrote you, I believe,. That I have consulted them on all
the matters you have raised. And I believe I transmitted answers
to you.

Here again, for a definitive answer one is stymied, and we ought
to be able to address these questions to Mr. Judge to secure a
response to them. I don't know it.

But I can guess that the way he arranged The VOICE OF THE SILENCE
(HPB) for publication made it easier for students to use. It
might be a good idea to define the "500+" alterations -- so
readers can get an idea of what you are referring to. We could
mention that H.P.Blavatsky had given Mr. Judge (as she says in
some of her letters -- read the U.L.T. Edn. of LETTERS THAT HAVE
HELPED ME from p 276 on to p. 283 to get an idea of the way in
which H.P.Blavatsky regarded him) the blanket right and sanction
to deal with her writings as he thought fit. So we might assume
he did that for a reason. I realize this guess will in no way
satisfy modern scholarship. But anything I might say, will
probably add only a fresh layer to the confusion of opinions.

As to your several questions. These I have answered already as
best I could.. Please reproduce them if you judge it is
necessary. I think that if those are adduced, so that the
current readership may take note of all side, it will be seen
that the main points have been addressed.

It is possible that we may have agreed to differ on some things.
But that makes neither of us "wrong." Does it ?

I can see some benefit arising from this matter: It might spur
some readers to make the comparisons we have made for themselves,
and to discover what the state of affairs actually is.

Why should they take your word, or mine, for this ? Why should
they not discover for themselves the accuracy, or otherwise, of
the texts now being offered to them? Why should we debate this?
Let them prove or disprove for themselves.

I say that THEOSOPHY is always acquired by FIRST-HAND and
INDIVIDUAL EFFORT and experience. I would also say that it is
not "literalism." It is the ability to understand the meaning of
the writer. It cannot be acquired by subscribing to the untested
opinion of any one else. Let the statement in The VOICE OF THE
SILENCE (HPB) [p. 29 ] " ...seek in the Impersonal for the
"Eternal Man;" and having sought him out, look inward: thou art
Buddha." Be our guide. We, each of us, have the same "Ray of the
Atma" (or the ONE SPIRIT) within -- does that engage in
controversy? Does that shed light on all facts ?

Your approach (it seems to me) is rather one sided, and one might
even say it has elements of "hectoring," and, unless you give
reasons for all of us to see, it is not understandable.. Are we
not in search of Truth? Are we so far apart ?

Best wishes,

Dallas

===============================.


-----Original Message-----
From: D. Caldwell
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 9:46 PM
To: BLAVATSKY.NET - STUDY
Cc:

Subject: Dallas again [!!!] on the originals of HPB's works


Subject: "In U.L.T. I don't have t[o] worry -- the originals
are available on a reliable basis. . . ." ??????????????


Dallas writes in part: [My comments follow his comments.]
----------------------------------------------------

"If you wish I can give you as an example the little book that
the Adyar Theosophical Publishing House issued under
H.P.Blavatsky's name as PRACTICAL OCCULTISM It is one of the
articles she wrote.
If you have a copy then compare it with the same article you have
reprinted by the U.L.T. in OCCULTISM OR RAJA-YOGA. The U.L.T.
is verbatim from H.P.Blavatsky's original article -- remember
proof reading it myself years ago. The ADYAR version has been
heavily edited. Then into that soup a creedal article by a
Brahmin originally printed in Vol. 10 of THEOSOPHIST is
introduced ( not H.P.Blavatsky at all) -- I made a comparison
and have a full description of the discrepancies. I sent this to
the Theosophical Publishing House in Adyar and the H O of the
Indian Section THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY in Benares -- but they never
acknowledged it nor did then change their printing."

"Another discrepancy list with over 43,000 changes is the reprint
in 1893 of The SECRET DOCTRINE (Vols. I and II) by the
Theosophical Publishing House in London after the original plates
were worn and no longer usable. This is easily checked.

"Vol. III of The SECRET DOCTRINE as edited by A. Besant is a
hodge podge of unedited MSS that H.P.Blavatsky had in her drawers
at the time of her death -- it was material intended to go into
LUCIFER, even some MSS held over from THEOSOPHIST.

"No, I am not making a case for the continuation of any special
Body. I am indicating the differences. In U.L.T. I don't have
to worry -- the originals are available on a reliable basis yet,
I have in many cases proof read and verified them with the
ORIGINALS. -- and I have done the same thing with the 15 (or so)
volumes of BLAVATSKY: COLLECTED WORKS. . . .

"I do not know whether you have the edited or unedited versions
which came out more recently. If you compare your copies with
H.P.Blavatsky's originals you will soon know if they have been
changed. In some cases the changes may be trivial, but in other
cases as I read, the changes make the original MEANING UNCLEAR.

"Personally I would rather deal with H.P.Blavatsky's "mistakes"
than with those created by others who have had the temerity to
believe they knew better than she did, and had the audacity to
introduce changes which she did not authorize. Strong language,
but true if it is applicable."

-----------------------------------

DANIEL COMMENTS AS FOLLOWS:


Dallas, I am totally dumbfounded that you would bring up the
above items without ALSO commenting on MODERN PANARION (a
collection of HPB's articles) reprinted by the Theosophy Company
and the edition of HPB's VOICE OF THE SILENCE also published by
the Theosophy Company.

Concerning HPB's article PRACTICAL OCCULTISM, Dallas, you write:

"The U.L.T. is verbatim from H.P.Blavatsky's original article --
remember proof reading it myself years ago. The ADYAR version
has been heavily edited."

Have you compared HPB's articles in MODERN PANARION with H.P.
Blavatsky's original articles? Dallas, are the articles in
MODERN PANARION verbatim with HPB's original articles?

In fact as you should know since I posted comparisons about a
year or so ago on several theosophical forums, the ULT/THEOSOPHY
CO.'s reprint of MODERN PANARION has been HEAVILY EDITED.

And what about the Theosophy Company's version of THE VOICE OF
THE SILENCE? You know that this version has more than 500
changes trivial or otherwise. Do you consider this edition
verbatim with the original 1889 edition of the VOICE? Before you
answer that please define what you mean by "verbatim".

You write concerning the PRACTICAL OCCULTISM article:

"The U.L.T. [edition] is verbatim from H.P.Blavatsky's original
article -- remember proof reading it myself years ago. The ADYAR
version has been heavily edited."

What do you mean here when you use the word "verbatim"? What do
you mean by writing that the ADYAR version is not verbatim.


DTB Get a copy and compare the Adyar booklet
with H.P.Blavatsky's original article. See if it covers is or
exceeds H.P.Blavatsky's article. If you wish to read a copy of
what I wrote to TPH Adyar I think I can find it and send it to
you.



Keeping in mind your use of the word "verbatim" above, compare
the Theosophical University Press edition of the VOICE with the
ULT's version of the VOICE. TUP's edition is verbatim. Can it
truly be stated that the ULT's version of the VOICE is ALSO
verbatim?

Furthermore, the 500 + changes in the ULT's VOICE are UNMARKED
CHANGES.


DTB Sorry, THEOSOPHY COMPANY made no "500+
changes," it reprinted Mr. Judge's New York edition of 1893 of
The VOICE OF THE SILENCE (HPB)


In recently published statements of yours, you say you are
against editions of HPB's works that are edited and the CHANGES
are UNMARKED. Yet for reasons unknown to me, you prefer to use
and quote from the ULT's edition of the VOICE with more than 500
+ changes that are UNMARKED.

Dallas, you are willing to criticize Adyar for their edition of
PRACTICAL OCCULTISM and even willing to write to them listing the
changes and then commenting: "but they never acknowledged it nor
did then change their printing."

I'm curious Dallas, have you protested to the Theosophy Company
about the numerous changes in MODERN PANARION and the ULT's
edition of the VOICE? Did you send them a list of the changes?
Are you asking THE THEOSOPHY COMPANY in their next printing of
these two titles to remove their changes (which HPB did NOT
approve) and publish facsimiles of HPB's original VOICE and of
her original articles?

So Dallas, is your statement:

"In U.L.T. I don't have t[o] worry -- the originals are
available on a reliable basis. . . ."

REALLY TRUE???????????

Dallas, why do you continue to criticize the Adyar editions of
HPB's writings while ignoring the above two mentioned
publications by the Theosophy Company?

Daniel