Theos-Talk Archives (September 2003 Message tt00105)

Katinka,

You wrote:

"HPB put most of the third volume to the flames before her death."

Katinka, I would love to see your sources that led you to believe 
that she destroyed "most of the third volume" before she died.

Daniel

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Katinka Hesselink" <mail@k...> 
wrote:
> Hi Mauri,
> 
> Did you read that material Daniel put together and I provided the 
link
> to? 
> 
> There wasn't a third volume to destroy. HPB put most of the third
> volume to the flames before her death. At least, that is how I 
gather
> it went. 
> The so called third volume is a combination of 'miscellaneous 
material
> found in HPB's desk' (this is in the preface as well I think) and 
the
> ES-material. Or at least a large portion of that. 
> 
> She did edit some, but that is pretty standard procedure in
> bookwriting. The only difference is that HPB didn't have the chance 
to
> check the editing. 
> 
> Katinka
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Mauri <mhart@i...> wrote:
> > Katinka wrote: <<
> > 
> > <<I don't think you have your facts straight. 
> > Besant did not start the
> > Liberal Catholic Church, nor was she much 
> > involved in it (if she had
> > been I doubt there would have been an all 
> > mail clergy). >>
> > 
> > Sorry, apparently my qualifiers didn't do 
> > much (?): I thought I was speculating more 
> > than factating in that post (not that ...). 
> > I picked up mention of "Liberal Catholic 
> > Church" in relation to Besant in Cleather's 
> > GREAT BETRAYAL. But ... ?
> > 
> > <<Also, Besant was one of the few people who 
> > took full responsibility
> > for her belief that Krishnamurti was the 
> > Messiah.>>
> > 
> > I got the impression from Cleather's GREAT 
> > BETRAYAL that Leadbeater might've influenced 
> > Besant on that score. And, in turn, 
> > Leadbeater might've been influenced by ... ? 
> > I'm wondering exactly who/what really 
> > influenced Leadbeater, since he seems to have 
> > (according to Cleather?)influenced Besant. 
> > Anyway, I plead guilty to not having read 
> > much of Besant's or Leadbeater's writings, 
> > except for Besant's Preface to SD III, so I 
> > wonder if I might've been (possibly ...) 
> > somewhat over-influenced by Cleather's 
> > writings, maybe ... Except that I can't seem 
> > to figure out why/how Besant (as per my 
> > interpretation of Cleather) failed in keeping 
> > at least one original, unedited version of SD 
> > III (among other things?) intact enough to 
> > pass on, in whatever condition it was found. 
> > My read of Besant's Preface to SD III 
> > (thanks to Jerome C)tends to suggest that she 
> > wanted the reader to believe in her wisdom 
> > when she wrote:
> > 
> > <<In "The Mystery of Buddha" a further 
> > difficulty arose; some of the Sections had 
> > been written four or five times over, each 
> > version containing some sentences that were 
> > not in the others; I have pieced these 
> > versions together,taking the fullest as 
> > basis, and inserting therein everything added 
> > in any other versions. It is, however, 
> > with some hesitation that I have
> > included these Sections in the Secret 
> > Doctrine . >>
> > 
> > But, to me, the words << I have pieced these 
> > versions together,taking the fullest as 
> > basis, and inserting therein everything added 
> > in any other versions. >> tends to suggest 
> > that she might've been interpreting what HPB 
> > was trying to say, and so might've been 
> > adding her own thoughts, edits into another 
> > authors work (ie, as if regardless of 
> > considers about what might be seen as a 
> > unique circumstance?). To me, Besant's 
> > wording isn't clear enough about the extent 
> > of her editing. To me, Besant's wording in 
> > that Preface tends to seem evasive, vague, 
> > curious: as if, on the one hand, she were 
> > trying to allay fears that she might've 
> > altered the manuscript with her editing, as 
> > per <<<I therefore do not feel justified in 
> > coming between the author and the public, 
> > either by altering the statements, to make 
> > them consistent with fact, or by suppressing 
> > the Sections.>>, but the nature of her 
> > explanation about the editing that she does 
> > admits to doing, on the other hand, leaves me 
> > in the dark, in that her words seem to imply 
> > (per my interpetation) that she seems to have 
> > hoped that the reader might be likely to 
> > assume that she knew what she was doing, for 
> > whatever reason. But, for all I know, Besant 
> > may have been advised by HPB to offer 
> > whatever Prefacial statements Besant saw fit 
> > enough. Cleather seems to differ, though, 
> > apparently? Anyway, of course my vague may 
> > not be your vague, so ...
> > 
> > Here' the Preface, again, as I got it from a 
> > Jerome C.
> > 
> > <<Preface
> > 
> > The task of preparing this volume for the 
> > press has been a difficult and anxious one, 
> > and it is necessary to state clearly what has 
> > been done. The papers given to me by H.P.B. 
> > were quite unarranged, and had no obvious 
> > order; I have therefore taken each paper as a 
> > separate Section, and have arranged them as 
> > sequentially as possible. With the exception 
> > of the correction of grammatical errors and 
> > the elimination of obviously un-English 
> > idioms, the papers are as H.P.B. left them, 
> > save as otherwise marked. In a few cases I 
> > have filled in a gap, but any such addition 
> > is enclosed within square brackets, so as to 
> > be distinguished from the text. In "The 
> > Mystery of Buddha" a further difficulty 
> > arose; some of the Sections had been written 
> > four or five times over, each version 
> > containing some sentences that were not in 
> > the others; I have pieced these versions 
> > together,taking the fullest as basis, and 
> > inserting therein everything added in any 
> > other versions. It is, however, with some 
> > hesitation that I have included these 
> > Sections in the Secret Doctrine .
> > 
> > Together with some most suggestive thought, 
> > they contain very numerous errors of fact, 
> > and many statements based on exoteric 
> > writings, not on esoteric knowledge. They 
> > were given into my hands to publish, as part 
> > of the Third Volume of the Secret Doctrine, 
> > and I therefore do not feel justified in 
> > coming between the author and the public, 
> > either by altering the statements, to make 
> > them consistent with fact, or by suppressing 
> > the Sections. She says she is acting entirely 
> > on her own authority, and it will be obvious 
> > to any instructed reader that she makes - 
> > possibly deliberately - many statements so 
> > confused that they are mere blinds, and other 
> > statements - probably inadvertently - that 
> > are nothing more than the exoteric 
> > misunderstandings of esoteric truths. The 
> > reader must here, as everywhere, use his own 
> > judgment, but feeling bound to publish these 
> > Sections, I cannot let them go to the public 
> > without a warning that much in them is 
> > certainly erroneous.
> > 
> > Doubtless, had the author herself issued this 
> > book, she would have entirely rewritten the 
> > whole of this division; as it was, it seemed 
> > best to give all she had said in the 
> > different copies, and to leave it in its 
> > rather unfinished state, for students will 
> > best like to have what she said as she said 
> > it, even though they may have to study it 
> > more closely than would have been the case 
> > had she remained to finish her work. The 
> > quotations made have been as far as possible 
> > found, and correct references given; in this 
> > most laborious work a whole band of earnest 
> > and painstaking students,under the guidance 
> > of Mrs. Cooper-Oakley, have been my willing 
> > assistants. Without their aid it would not 
> > have been possible to give the references, as 
> > often a whole book had to be searched 
> > through, in order to find a paragraph of a 
> > few lines.
> > 
> > This volume completes the papers left by 
> > H.P.B., with the exception of a few scattered 
> > articles that yet remain and that will be 
> > published in her own magazine Lucifer. Her 
> > pupils are well aware that few will be found 
> > in the present generation to do justice to 
> > the occult knowledge of H.P.B., and to her 
> > magnificent sweep of thoughts, but as she can 
> > wait to future generations for the 
> > justification of her greatness as a teacher, 
> > so can her pupils afford to wait for the 
> > justification of their trust. ANNIE BESANT.
> >