Theos-Talk Archives (February 2004 Message tt00174)

HPB may have very well been a high Adept, but she did describe herself as 
only a Chela. This is according to her. She never started any kind of Blavatsky 
Foundation around herself or any primary or secondary schools based on her 
teachings. She did not have every single dialogue she had with students and 
observers recorded and published as if she was speaking some authoritative 
truth. 

She wanted to be known only as a Chela who was working in devotion to her 
Masters and I think that is what makes her all the more remarkable. So 
perhaps we should just leave it at that.

Ariel


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Dallas TenBroeck" <dalval14@e...> 
wrote:
> Feb 26 2004
> 
> RE: WAS HPB AN ADEPT?
> 
> 
> Dear Bart:
> 
> 
> For reasons of your own you appear to me to down-play HPB's importance. 
> 
> Were it not for her devotion we would not have Theosophy to study. I
> find in ISIS UNVEILED Vol. II pp. 92-3 some statements about the
> "petroma," or the "interpreter." I believe those might be applied to
> the office that HPB assumed. As far as I know she adopted that position
> in this last incarnation of hers. 
> 
> As to whether we can label her an "Adept," or not, is rather a difficult
> task -- since as far as I know, we lack experience and competence to do
> that. And even if we could, of what value is it? There is no question
> that HPB was far more competent than most of us could ever claim. Do we
> yet deserve the praise and regard that the Masters bestowed upon her? 
> 
> To me, the "labels" she deserves are to be found implicit in her
> writings and work.
> 
> But this subject is not new, and has been raised ever since the body she
> used died May 8th., 1891.
> 
> I respect and am grateful to HPB for this beyond words. It has opened
> for me (this incarnation) from an early age, new horizons in terms of
> duty, responsibility and knowledge -- far beyond anything our academies
> have been able to unveil to date. 
> 
> So permit me to say that I feel you are not giving her adequate justice.
> We don't know enough to write (as evidence of our competence) a 
"SECRET
> DOCTRINE," or a "The VOICE OF THE SILENCE" -- and, for myself, as the
> Buddhist Bhikkus say, I can, at best, aver: "Thus I have heard....."
> 
> As her pupil I feel it is my duty to protest on her behalf, and on
> behalf of the great Masters she claimed to represent in the world, at a
> time and cycle when Their wisdom was again more particularly revealed. 
> 
> We are those who can profit from those revelations and follow the clues
> that they point to. Those who are at the cutting edge of academic
> research have found HPB's contributions open doors and windows on past
> wisdom. Any one who opens either ISIS UNVEILED or the SECRET 
DOCTRINE
> is immediately struck with the erudition of its author (or writer), as
> HPB desired to be known. We all need a great degree of humility, and
> diligence to attempt to follow those grand footsteps.
> 
> We can, all of us, recall that many of the gaps in knowledge and history
> -- joining our current work and discoveries to the works done and known
> by the ancients -- have been bridged by THEOSOPHY. This has been
> needed, because of the systematic destruction (in the "West") in past
> centuries by religious fanatics of evidence to their existence.
> 
> If we were able to write as she did, then we might presume to try to
> value and criticize her. But would that be necessary? What is gained?
> 
> 
> The Masters did say the following, as quoted below:
> 
> ---------------------------------------
> 
> AUTHORSHIP OF SECRET DOCTRINE
> 
> A good deal has been said about the writing of Isis Unveiled, and later
> of the Secret Doctrine, both by H. P. Blavatsky. A writer in the
> spiritualistic journals took great pains to show how many books the
> first work seems to quote from, and the conclusion to be arrived at
> after reading his diatribes is that H.P.B. had an enormous library at
> her disposal, and of course in her house, for she never went out, or
> that she had agents at great expense copying books, or, lastly, that by
> some process or power not known to the world was able to read books at a
> distance, as, for instance, in the Vatican at Rome and the British
> Museum. 
> 
> The last is the fact. She lived in a small flat when writing the first
> book and had very few works on hand, all she had being of the ordinary
> common sort. She herself very often told how she gained her information
> as to modern books. No secret was made of it, for those who were with
> her saw day after day that she could gaze with ease into the astral
> light and glean whatever she wanted. But in the early days she did not
> say precisely to the public that she was in fact helped in that work by
> the Masters, who gave from time to time certain facts she could not get
> otherwise. 
> 
> The Secret Doctrine, however, makes no disguise of the real help, and
> she asserts, as also many of us believe, that the Masters had a hand in
> that great production. 
> 
> The letters sent to Mr. Sinnett formed the ground for Esoteric Buddhism,
> as was intended, but as time went on it was seen that some more of the
> veil had to be lifted and certain misconceptions cleared up; hence the
> Secret Doctrine was written, and mostly by the Masters themselves,
> except that she did the arranging of it.
> 
> For some time it was too much the custom of those who had received at
> the hands of H.P.B. words and letters from her Masters to please
> themselves with the imagination that she was no more in touch with the
> original fount, and that, forsooth, these people could decide for
> themselves what was from her brain and what from the Masters. 
> 
> But it is now time to give out a certificate given when the Secret
> Doctrine was being written, a certificate signed by the Masters who have
> given out all that is new in our theosophical books. It was sent to one
> who had then a few doubts, and at the same time copies were given from
> the same source to others for use in the future, which is now. The first
> certificate runs thus:
> 
> ":I wonder if this note of mine is worthy of occupying a select spot
> with the documents reproduced, and which of the peculiarities of the
> "Blavatskian" style of writing it will be found to most resemble? The
> present is simply to satisfy the Doctor that "the more proof given the
> less believed." Let him take my advice and not make these two documents
> public. It is for his own satisfaction the undersigned is happy to
> assure him that the Secret Doctrine, when ready, will be the triple
> production of [here are the names of one of the Masters and of H.P.B.]
> and _______ most humble servant, [signed by the other.]"
> 
> 
> On the back of this was the following, signed by the Master who is
> mentioned in the above:
> 
> 
> "If this can be of any use or help to _____, though I doubt it, I, the
> humble undersigned Faquir, certify that the Secret Doctrine is dictated
> to [name of H.P.B.], partly by myself and partly by my brother ______."
> 
> 
> A year after this, certain doubts having arisen in the minds of
> individuals, another letter from one of the signers of the foregoing was
> sent and reads as follows. As the prophecy in it has come true, it is
> now the time to publish it for the benefit of those who know something
> of how to take and understand such letters. For the outside it will all
> be so much nonsense.
> 
> 
> "The certificate given last year saying the Secret Doctrine would be
> when finished the triple production of [H.P.B.'s name], ________, and
> myself was and is correct, although some have doubted not only the facts
> given in it but also the authenticity of the message in which it was
> contained. Copy this and also keep the copy of the aforesaid
> certificate. You will find them both of use on the day when you shall,
> as will happen without your asking, receive from the hands of the very
> person to whom the certificate was given, the original for the purpose
> of allowing you to copy it; and then you can verify the correctness of
> this presently forwarded copy. And it may then be well to indicate to
> those wishing to know what portions in the Secret Doctrine have been
> copied by the pen of [H.P.B.'s name] into its pages, though without
> quotation marks, from my own manuscript and perhaps from ______, 
though
> the last is more difficult from the rarity of his known writing and
> greater ignorance of his style. All this and more will be found
> necessary as time goes on, but for which you are well qualified to
> wait."
> 
> ONE OF THE STAFF
> 
> Path, April, 1893
> 
> --------------------------------------
> 
> Additionally this valuable letter was circulated about a year after the
> death of HPB in 1893
> 
> ------------------------
> 
> 
> H. P. B'S MISSION
> 
> A report given in 1893
> 
> From: "A Letter" - written by : S. K. Lahiri, FTS, Lahore
> _______
> [ NOTE : HPB's body died May 8th 1891. This letter was circulated by
> WQJ & AB privately. ] 
> 
> Synopsis:--
> 
> After the death of HPB's body, one of the Hindu members of the TS, B. K.
> Lahiri of Lahore, knowing that a brahmin Yogi was going on a pilgrimage
> into the Himalayas in 1892-93, asked him, if he should meet one of the
> Mahatmas, to ask of him what the destiny of the TS would be, so far as
> India was concerned, and, as HPB had departed, whether another 
"Teacher"
> would be sent to India to help the Theosophists left there.
> 
> It must be mentioned that at the time of this commission, the brahmin
> Yogi did not know about the TS or of HPB.
> 
> When this pilgrim returned some time later from the Himalayas and again
> met the Hindu FTS (Lahiri), the first thing he said was:
> 
> 
> "Go on! Go on! Make yourselves fit! You have much to do! Go on!"
> 
> Next he said he felt thrice blessed in meeting one of the Mahatmas, and,
> in answer to his questions received these indications (as the Mahatma
> was under a vow of silence and did not speak) :
> 
> "The TS was Their work.
> 
> "It was established to change the present current of the human mind and
> to destroy materialism (Nastikaism) in the world generally.
> 
> "He, the Mahatma, was a member of the Circle, and had been present when
> HPB was sent out by her Master into the world to carry out Their Work.
> 
> "He was of a very high degree. Her Master was superior even to him in
> the Circle. She also belonged to a high degree, and, it was not proper
> to ask who she is, or where she is now.
> 
> "Col. Olcott was rated a good man, but no yogi. He is entirely
> different from HPB, and his name does not deserve to be mentioned in the
> same breath as Hers.
> 
> " HPB's mission had been successful. They would not send anyone further
> to India for some time. The Work had to be carried on by those already
> in the TS using the instructions already given to them, and it was up to
> them to see that they "keep it (the link ?) intact."
> 
> Since his return this brahmin Yogi views the potential of the TS in a
> different light: 
> 
> "Go on! Go on, and go on! There is much for you to do; fit
> yourselves; I venerate the memory of HPB, that she has done so much
> good for humanity and for India, such as was done in the past by Buddha,
> and by Shankaracharya. 
> 
> The TS was established by the Mahatmas for certain purposes. "Go on!
> Go on! And work, and work!"
> 
> The Hindu FTS then asked the pilgrim if he could convey this report to
> those who worked in the West for the TS. His answer was that the
> Mahatma had not told him to keep it a secret, but to reveal this only to
> those who are worthy of receiving it. 
> 
> Accordingly B. K. Lahiri had sent a letter to Mr. Judge and to Annie
> Besant for them to distribute to those worthy of seeing it, and who
> would be inspired by it.
> 
> -----------------------
> 
> 
> I hope this might prove helpful.
> 
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Dallas
> 
> ==================================
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> 
> From: Bart 
> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 8:35 AM
> To: 
> Subject: Re: female masters
> 
> Ali Hassan wrote:
> 
> > I would think that one of the reasons HPB [and AAB after her]
> manifested in 
> > a female body was to symbolize and inform that in this new
> dispensation, 
> > women are to assume their rightful and equal role in all strata of
> society.
> 
> > I'd also wonder that if so-called Adepts are easily distracted by
> women, 
> > what claim they can lay to actually being 'Adept'?
> 
> ---------------------
> 
> A) Blavatsky was not an Adept. She wasn't even a particularly
> good 
> choice for the projects the Adepts had in mind. She was just the best 
> available at the time.
> 
> B) Who said "easily distracted"? Note that they are not Mahatmas
> all 
> the time, and they ARE human. We do not know the level of concentration 
> and mutual trust that is required for them to act as Adepts, but, based 
> on the care with which chelas are picked and trained, it would appear 
> that the ability of the group to work as a single unit requires 
> near-perfect compatibility.
> 
> Bart