Theos-Talk Archives (July 2001 Message tt00248)

Thank you Dallas for your answer BELOW.

The major points of my email sent yesterday were:

(1) Why do you criticize the titles published by
the Adyar Society yet you do not ALSO mention the two
titles published by the Theosophy Company?

(2) Is it really fair of you to ignore those Theosophy

Company titles especially when in the same email you
write:

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

Remember that many of your readers may be inquirers
and therefore new to this subject. 

Dallas, I fully AGREE with YOUR assessment of the
PRACTICAL OCCULTISM article and the 1893 edition
of the SD. It is obvious that they are NOT
verbatim with the originals and that in fact they
were edited and hundreds of changes were made to HPB's
original texts.

Isn't this assessment obvious not only to you and
me but to anyone who can compare the text? Unless
the person doing the comparison is brain-dead, I 
believe they would agree with our assessment.

THEREFORE why is it so apparently difficult for you
to equally admit with me that both MODERN PANARION and
the Theosophy Company's edition of THE VOICE
OF THE SILENCE are ALSO edited and hundreds of changes
were made to HPB's original texts?

Why are you willing to "defend" the reprinting of
MODERN PANARION? Is it because you "belong" to the
"organization" that was responsible for the reprint?

Let me ask you these four questions: What if it had
been the Theosophical Publishing House, Adyar which
had reprinted in 1981 the book MODERN PANARION. If
they had done that:

Would you have been criticizing their decision to
reprint this volume?

Would you have been writing them a letter listing all
the changes, etc.?

Would you have been lamenting the fact that this
publisher might not be acknowledging your corrections?
etc. etc.

Would you be disagreeing with my assessment that HPB's
articles in MODERN PANARION have been edited and
hundreds of deletions, additions and changes have been
introduced into HPB's text?

Dallas, at the end of your current email you write:

"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 ?"

Please Dallas explain to me and anyone else reading
this email why my approach is "rather one sided". 
Please give us the reasons for this statement of your?

And if you think my "approach" has "elements of
'hectoring'", then why didn't you complain when I used
the SAME approach to call some of K.Paul Johnson's
statements about HPB and the Masters into question? 
In fact, you complimented me on my approach.
No doubt, Mr. Johnson thought I was hectoring him. In
fact, Mr. Johnson thought YOU were hectoring him when
you also criticized some of his statements and
demanded evidence from him.

But Dallas, everything you say in the last paragraph
about my approach is really irrelevant to the CENTRAL
issues under discussion. You can attribute to me some
bad approach or motive or whatnot but that does not
change the fact that in the specific cases under
discussion both the Adyar publisher (and its
counterpart in London) and the Theosophy Company in 
Los Angeles have published versions of HPB's writings
which have been edited, ie. words, etc. have been
added, deleted and changed and the readers of such
works have not been notified by the publishers of any
of these changes. In fact, the changes are as you
like to call them - UNMARKED. 

I am willing to admit what is obvious to any unbiased
person who examines all of the books in question. Are
you also willing to admit the obvious?

In summary , I can somewhat understand why ULT
associates accept the "edited" version of the VOICE
but I am completely baffled why any ULT associate
(knowing the facts in this case) would accept THE
MODERN PANARION volume.

Finally, I cannot understand why the ULT and the
Theosophy Company sells a volume that perpetuates
hundreds of multilations made by G.R.S. Mead to HPB's
original articles. 

Daniel 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <dalval14@earthlink.net>
To: BN-STUDY <study@blavatsky.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 5:13 PM
Subject: RE: Dallas again on originals of HPB's works
Theosophy Company reprints.


> 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
> 



=====
Daniel H. Caldwell
info@blavatskyarchives.com
BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
http://blavatskyarchives.com
You can always access BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES 
by simply typing into the URL address bar 
the following 6 characters: hpb.cc

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/