Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00343)

Hi Daniel and all of you,

Thanks Daniel.
And Yes? So where is the TRUTH in all the theosophical teaching ?
Was HPB a liar ? And to what degree ?
Maybe she was a spiritual DESIGNER, so the one experienceing the DESIGN (the
article, book etc...) would learn and benefit from it - spirituallly,
wheather the person would know of it or NOT.
I think the interested student of wisdom teaching will have to learn to
develop his or her "thinking" capeabilities - or learn how to learn, - i.e.
learn wisdom and non-linear thinking!
But do the student want to learn ?

from
M. Sufilight with a smile...


----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel H. Caldwell" <comments@blavatskyarchives.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 3:49 AM
Subject: Theos-World Madame Blavatsky on the letter written by Sriman Swamy


> In a letter dated "London, 21-Nov., 1889" to Mr. N. D. Khandalavala,
> Madame Blavatsky made the following comments on the letter written by
> Sriman Swamy:
>
> "My Dear Mr. Khandalavala,
>
> I have given to your letter of the 25th Oct., the closest attention,
> though there is nothing in it I did not know before; and now shall
> answer it with all seriousness. . . . As regards the state of the
> Indian Sections of the Society, and the complaints against Olcott, I
> observe the following things. . . .
>
> . . . That Damodar is believed to have been driven away by harsh
> treatment to live or die as he pleased; and that he is, in fact,
> dead.
>
> . . . . That the publication of Sriman Swamy's letter by me [in
> Lucifer] is traceable to Col. Olcott's 'craving for strange stories
> and his anxiety to publish them without throughly verifying them in
> the first instance.'
>
> . . . Let me reply. . . .
>
> . . . Damodar is not dead, and Olcott knows it as well as I do. I
> had a letter from him not more than 3 months ago. . . .
>
> . . . No matter what your lying Sriman Swamy may, or may not be ---
> one cannot always tell --- he passed successfully through a cross
> examination by Mr. Subba Row, who pronounced him a real 'chela of the
> 2nd Class' to several witnesses in Madras --- Judge Srinivas Row
> among others, Olcott, etc. Without help he [Sriman Swamy] identified
> the two portraits [of the Masters M. and K.H.] saying which was
> which, and gave facts not obtainable from books. The certificate he
> gave was sent [to me] by Harte as a duplicate of what was to appear
> in the Theosophist, and I printed it [in the September 1889 issue of
> Lucifer] for reasons of my own, even after Harte had written that he
> suppressed it (1) (through funk of the disbelieving Hindus) at
> Adyar. I made no comments on it [when published in Lucifer] because
> there were two fibs in it: (a) Damodar never was at Lhassa nor
> Sriman Swamy either, and not being permitted to say where he saw
> Damodar he gave a wrong name; and (b) My Master never told him what
> he says of me, but he heard it from a chela. I printed it with the
> lies, for two reasons --- firstly, since I published it at all I had
> no right to change one word; secondly, I wanted to see what they
> would say in India to this; in India where every lie is believed and
> repeated most readily, while truth is rejected, smothered shot out of
> the guns (metaphorically) by rulers and by the ruled. Aye, India
> does crucify truth as readily as it is crucified here [in England].
> Therefore, it was not yet intimated to me Mr. Subba Row had
> discovered his mistake about the Swamy being 'a chela of the 2nd
> Class,' whatever it may mean in India, as in Tibet it means
> nothing. . . ." The Theosophist (Adyar, Madras, India), August 1932,
> pp. 618-619, 623-625.
>
> (1) The letter from Sriman Swamy was never published in the
> Theosophist. H.P. Blavatsky printed it in Lucifer. See Madame
> Blavatsky's comments above. --- BA Editor.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>