theos-talk.com

[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX]

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Theos-World More Controversy about LETTERS OF HPB, Volume I

Oct 08, 2004 01:25 PM
by Ernest Pelletier


Respected theos-talk recipients.

I have been asked to forward to you the response from the
Editor of FOHAT, a respected international Theosophical
magazine published in Canada.

Since the Editor of FOHAT is not on theos-talk he asked me to convey
to you where the rebuttal to Daniel Caldwell's challenge over the
controversy about LETTERS OF HPB, Volume 1,can be found.

The address is www.theosophycanada.com/fohat_plea.htm


"Daniel H. Caldwell" wrote:

> The Fall, 2004 issue of FOHAT contains an
> editorial and 3 letters from readers
> criticizing John Algeo for including in Volume
> I of the LETTERS OF H.P. BLAVATSKY the
> "spy letter" (Letter No. 7) and nineteen
> "Solovyov letters" (especially letters No. 12,
> 17, 53, 69 and 76). These letters are considered
> by the editor and 3 readers to be frauds or
> at least partial fabrications.
>
> Ramon Sordo of Mexico writes:
>
> "I think that these letters should be taken
> out of the collection...."
>
> Elinor Roos comments:
>
> "In my opinion Letter 7 must have been
> fabricated and should never have been
> published."
>
> Karin D. Smith remarked:
>
> "Don't we have a duty to our readers and fellow
> Theosophists to search for the truth, and if
> not available, then to ignore those letters,
> consider them inauthentic, and therefore
> not include them in HER collected letters?"
>
> Sordo also writes:
>
> "...are we to expect published in the next
> volumes the forgeries of Monsier et Madame
> Coulomb?"
>
> Roos remarks:
>
> "...there are still more volumes of THE LETTERS
> OF H.P. BLAVATSKY pending, and one wonders what other
> questionable letters - even more discreditable
> to H.P.B. than this one [No. 7] - might he
> [Dr. Algeo] not be tempted to publish...."
>
> And Smith comments:
>
> "I truly hope that John Algeo and the editors will
> be more careful in their choice of material
> especially when they come to the era of the Coulombs."
>
> As a member of the editorial board for the letters,
> I could not disagree more with the view of
> these writers to, in effect, censor these
> specific letters and not publish them.
>
> Readers should have easy access to these
> letters. A reader can then decide whether
> he/she believes a certain letter is a forgery
> or not.
>
> As far as I know, all of the Blavatsky-Coulomb
> letters will be included in future volumes,
> and IF they were excluded I would not want to
> be a member of the editorial team.
>
> Jean Overton-Fuller in her Blavatsky biography
> believes OTHER Blavatsky letters are forgeries.
> Should we therefore exclude those too from
> future volumes???
>
> I also strongly disagree with the following
> editorial comments:
>
> "One could conclude...that the powers of
> Wheaton and Adyar are trying to introduce
> a perverted understanding of Blavatsky
> into the world...."
>
> "There are very good political reasons
> for including those letters. Adyar and
> Wheaton embrace a brand of 'theosophy'
> that is built upon the work of Annie Besant,
> Charles Leadbeater, and their worshipping
> followers."
>
> "Adyar and Wheaton have to believe, and they
> have to ensure that their members believe in
> the sainthood of at least Besant. This
> sainthood cannot be guaranteed if Blavatsky,
> Judge and their interpretations of the Masters
> are not made suspect. The easiest way to
> accomplish this is to attack the reputations
> of these two founders of the society and
> attribute to them base, political motives,
> to make them as ethical as a Jesuit. Adyar
> and Wheaton obviously want these letters
> included in these collections and you can
> be sure that they will not be the last of
> their type. There will be other letters
> of the same ilk in future volumes. If
> you are members of these organizations, do
> not let your leadership get away with this."
>
> All I can say is "Flapdoodle"!
>
> In light of this kind of "reasoning",
> I ask the editor of FOHAT: do you therefore
> ascribe the same base motives to the late
> John Cooper? I ask you this question
> because Cooper ALSO included these
> "fraudulent" letters in his "edition" of HPB's
> letters. See Cooper's dissertation for proof
> of my statement.
>
> And I must also have the same base motive
> since I agreed with both Algeo and Cooper
> that these letters should be included in
> the published volume.
>
> Daniel H. Caldwell
> http://blavatskystudycenter.org
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>





[Back to Top]


Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application