Theos-Talk Archives (December 2004 Message tt00212)

Dec 17 2004

Re:	"Faults" said to be in SECRET DOCTRINE ?  
Are you saying the MASTERS are wrong?  


Dear friend Anand, and other friends:

First of all:  

Have you found some errors in HPB's SECRET DOCTRINE or other
writings ?  

Can you detect any ?

A list would be helpful, or, is this written by you out of doubt or
envy ? Does it betray your own limitations ?  

If on the other hand, the SECRET DOCTRINE is truthful, as the MASTERS vouch
for it, and say they produced it along with HPB, then why do you oppose THEM
? [ See certificate given, below copied.]

I trust, that in publishing this, you do not mean to imply that you feel
obligated, or able, to try to "correct" HPB ?

If Mr. Subba Row was correct, then why did he not write some articles that
correct the book? His opinion, given to Olcott (as reported) is lacking in
both substance and evidence.

I wonder if you realize that it is you who are trying to place doubts
concerning HPB, the Masters, and the SECRET DOCTRINE in the minds of readers
or potential students.  

BUT WHY ?

WHAT DANGERS ARE TO BE FOUND THERE ?


I remind you of the CERTIFICATES of authorship that the Masters gave to the
SECRET DOCTRINE 

Best wishes,

Dallas
 
==============================

-----Original Message-----
From: Anand Gholap 
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 3:09 PM
To: 
Subject: HPB admitted she misunderstood teaching given by Masters

On 4 th January 1887 HPB wrote letter to Col. Olcott after Subba Raw 
(S.R.) gave opinion about Proem of SD. 

HPB writes  


" ........Let S.R. do what he likes. I give him carte 
blanche. I trust in his wisdom far more than in mine, for I may have 
misunderstood in many a point both Master and the Old G. (other 
Adept). They give me facts only and rarely dictate in succession. I 
am no maker of books you know it........"

It not only tells wisdom of SR but also tells that she did 
misunderstand things which went into her writing.

Later when she sent draft of Secrete Doctrine to Subba Raw for 
correcting mistakes. He went through it and told her that if he was 
to correct it he would have to write whole book again. 

================================================

CERTIFICATES GIVEN BY THE MASTERS

There exists the certificates given by the Masters to Dr. Hubbe-Schleiden -
reprinted in PATH for 1893, Vol. 8, pp. 1-3.  

These read:  

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 --:


In The PATH for July 1895, Mr. Judge published an article: 

"H.P.B. ON MESSAGES FROM MASTERS."  
[Reprinted in WQJ Articles, Vol. I, p. 55]

It reads:

"Some years ago H.P.B. was charged [ by A. P. Sinnett ] with misuse of
Mahatmas' names and handwritings, with forgery of messages from the
Mahatmas, and with humbugging the public and the T.S. therewith. Those
charges had floated vaguely about for sometime...afterwards, writing on the
subject in "LODGES OF MAGIC" [ HPB Articles 1, p. 291 ] in LUCIFER [Vol. 3,
pp. 92-3 ] the question of genuineness or the opposite of such messages was
dealt with, and what she wrote is here presented for reconsideration.  

It covers two matters.

FIRST, it proves out of her own mouth what the PATH not long ago said that
"if one letter has to be doubted then all have" to be doubted. Hence if the
"Letter to some Brahmins" ["Prayag Letter" -- MAHATMA LETTERS, p. 461-3 --]
is a fraud, as Col. Olcott and another say, then all the rest are, also.

SECOND, it applies precisely to the present state of affairs in respect to
messages from Masters, just as it she had so long ago foreseen the present
and left the article so that tyros in occultism, such as the present
agitators are, might have something to show them how to use their judgment.
The portion selected from her article reads:

"We have been asked by a correspondent why he should not "be free to
suspect some of the so-called 'precipitated' letters as being forgeries,"
giving as his reason for it that while some of them bear the stamp of (to
him) undeniable genuineness, others seem from their contents and style, to
be imitations.  

This is equivalent of saying that he had such an unerring
spiritual insight as to be able to detect the false from the true, though he
has never met a Master, nor been given any key by which to test his alleged
communications.  

The inevitable consequence of applying his untrained
judgment in such cases, would be to make his as likely as not to declare
false what was genuine and genuine what was false. Thus what criterion has
any one to decide between one "precipitated" letter, or another such letter?

Who except their authors, or those whom they employ as their amanuenses (the
chelas and disciples) can tell? For it hardly one out of a hundred "occult"
letters that is ever written in the hand of the Master, in whose name and on
whose behalf they are sent, as the Masters have neither need nor leisure to
write them; and when a Master says: "I wrote that letter" it means only
that every word in it was dictated by him and impressed under his direct
supervision.  

Generally they make their chela, whether near or far away, write (or
precipitate) them, by impressing upon his mind the ideas they wish
expressed, and if necessary aiding him in the picture printing process of
precipitation. It depends entirely upon the chela's state of development,
how accurately the ideas may be transmitted and the writing-model imitated.

Thus the non-adept recipient is left in the dilemma of uncertainty, whether
if one letter is false all may not be, for as far as intrinsic evidence
goes, all come from the same source, and all are brought by the same
mysterious means. But there is another and far worse condition implied.
All the so-called occult letters being supported by identical proofs, they
have all to stand or fall together. If one is to be doubted, then all have,
and the series of letters in the OCCULT WORLD, ESOTERIC BUDDHISM, etc.,
etc., may be, and there is no reason why they should not be in such a
case ,-- frauds, "clever impostures," and "forgeries" such as the ingenuous
though stupid agent of the "S.P.R." has made them out to be, in order to
raise in the public estimation the scientific acumen and standard of his
"Principals"... [H.P.B.]


================================

	


The scope of the original Theosophical literature HPB produced and to which
the Masters certified (PATH, Vol. 8, p. 1 -3) is adequate proof of this
fact. In addition, the MAHATMA LETTERS provide us with further
demonstrations of the ubiquity and power of perception that a real knowledge
of THEOSOPHY provides.

Yes, both HPB and the Masters have said that nothing ought to be taken on
"faith," or blindly.

But that does not imply they erred.  

I have found no serious refutation of the philosophy or the 
facts of history adduced in the "original literature"
that alerts us to any real need for describing THEOSOPHY as faulty. If
there are any of the general principles that are found to be flawed, I would
very much like to have those exposed.  

With profound personal respect for HPB her sacrificial work, old, feeble and
infirm, and for the Masters of Wisdom who inspired this magnificent effort
-- who are we to carp? And complain? Or seek to demean that work? 

In my opinion we know so little ourselves, all of us, that it is
inappropriate to criticize.

Let me add 


Theosophy will only be understood by those who study and seek to
understand it. To rely on opinions (specially mine, or of anyone else) is
unfair to Theosophy because none of us can do it justice. At best we can
only tell others of what we have learned (or not learned) from it. 

The potter who made the cup and saucer found among tangled roots of plants
is Simla (India, the Himalayan Town North of New Delhi) was not questioned.
The cup was used to provide tea at an impromptu picnic.  

The SECRET DOCTRINE can sit on one's shelf indefinitely, but, until one
reads it, one has no concept of its contents. No amount of opinions portray
the contents of the book nor can they predict a reader's reaction to
studying it. 

I therefore always encourage direct contact because any other writing about
Theosophy is inevitably opinionated -- it is second-hand Theosophy at best.
But the respect we show for its teachers and messengers is due to the work
They did and continue to do.

------ provides his opinion -- to which he is entitled. The proof of the
value of THEOSOPHY lies in the reader's comprehension of what is offered
there. To offer an opinion that may dissuade a potential theosophist from
making direct contact and framing therefrom his own opinions, is dangerous
in my esteem.  

Theosophy is not proved or demonstrated by the discovery of spare tea cups
and saucers to match. Theosophy is offered as a practical way of living,
based on actual universal Laws of all life, and the history, recorded by the
Sages, of its evolution. 

Let me show from documents of the early days of the teaching of Theosophy
what is said by Master K H in a letter to Col. Olcott delivered at sea on
board the S. S. Shannon as he was coming to Europe in 1888 : --

"Try to remove such misconceptions as you will find, by kind persuasion and
an appeal to the feelings of loyalty to the Cause of truth if not to us. 

Make all these men feel that we have no favourites, nor affections for
persons, but only for their good acts and humanity as a whole. 

But we employ agents -- the best available. Of these for the past thirty
years the chief has been the personality known as H. P. B. to the world (but
otherwise to us). Imperfect and very troublesome, no doubt, she proves to
some, nevertheless, there is no likelihood of our finding a better one for
years to come -- and your theosophists should be made to understand it. 

Since 1885 I have not written, nor caused to be written save thro' her
agency, direct or remote, a letter or line to anybody in Europe or America,
nor communicated orally with, or thro' any third party. Theosophists should
learn it. You will understand later the significance of this declaration so
keep it in mind. Her fidelity to our work being constant, and her sufferings
having come upon her thro' it, neither I nor either of my Brother associates
will desert or supplant her. As I once before remarked, ingratitude is not
among our vices. 

With yourself our relations are direct, and have been with the rare
exceptions you know of, like the present, on the psychical plane, and so
will continue thro' force of circumstances. That they are so rare -- is your
own fault as I told you in my last. 

To help you in your present perplexity: 

H. P. B. has next to no concern with administrative details, and should be
kept clear of them, so far as her strong nature can be controlled. 

But this you must tell to all: -- With occult matters she has everything to
do. We have not abandoned her; she is not "given over to chelas." 

She is our direct agent. I warn you against permitting your suspicions and
resentment against "her many follies" to bias your intuitive loyalty to her.
In the adjustment of this European business, you will have two things to
consider -- the external and administrative, and the internal and psychical.
Keep the former under your control and that of your most prudent associates,
jointly; leave the latter to her. 

You are left to devise the practical details with your usual ingenuity. Only
be careful, I say, to discriminate when some emergent interference of hers
in practical affairs is referred to you on appeal, between that which is
merely exoteric in origin and effects, and that which beginning on the
practical tends to beget consequences on the spiritual plane. As to the
former you are the best judge, as to the latter, she. 

I have also noted, your thoughts about the "SECRET DOCTRINE." Be assured
that what she has not annotated from scientific and other works, we have
given or suggested to her. Every mistake or erroneous notion, corrected and
explained by her from the works of other theosophists was corrected by me,
or under my instruction. It is a more valuable work than its predecessor, an
epitome of occult truths that will make it a source of information and
instruction for the earnest student for long years to come. . . . "
LETTERS FROM THE MASTERS OF WISDOM 3rd Series, p. 52-4


==================================

Altering The SECRET DOCTRINE Why ?

Why would one desire to alter the Secret Doctrine ? Is there a secret
desire to prove that in some respect the alterer is superior to HPB or to
the Masters ?

HPB showed herself a true teacher when she wrote: " Do not follow me or my
path; follow the Path I show, the Masters who are behind."

We can see the wisdom in this advice when we consider the course
of history - of those who judged the "teaching" by what they
could see of the "teacher." They judged her by their standards.
Not by her adhesion to the Theosophy she taught.

W. Q. Judge had the same judgment passed on him, historically,
because he upheld HPB first, last, and all the time. Why is that
so ? Is it not because there were those who were fearful of
"authority ?" So fearful that they tried to convey the
impression that they knew better than she, and could "explain her
away."

The results of this are plain today, a 100 years later, as many
who claim to be "Theosophists," or "students of theosophy," have
scanty concepts as to what Theosophy (as a body of knowledge)
says or teaches. They are usually unfamiliar with what H P B wrote.
Even the KEY TO THEOSOPHY is usually unstudied by them

That it offers the freedom from creedal restraints and is
eclectic, everyone applauds. That its societies and other
student-bodies offer forums for mutual study and debate is
recognized as a plus.  

But THEOSOPHY ? As a Philosophy, as a Doctrine ?

How many know it chapter and verse so as to be able to explain
it to new-comers as well as to themselves. Why is it that
Theosophical doctrines cover: --

1. the 3 Fundamentals (Universality, Law, Evolution and
perfection for all),

2. the 7 Principles (Spirit, Wisdom, Mind, Emotions, Life, Model
body, physical Body),

3. the 3-fold Evolutionary scheme (Spirit, Mind, Form) -

4. the Immortality of the MONAD, and its interminable gyrations
through evolution from High to low and from low to high -

5. the development of CONSCIOUSNESS and Intelligence,

6. Reincarnation, Karma, Causality, Responsibility,

7. and Potential PERFECTION for all.

Some of HPB's critics looked actively for "mistakes." - and found
some minor ones - as to whether they were hers or those of
proof-readers is not known. [ See H P B's MY BOOKS ]

In any case those critics made claims, overt or subtle, to an
"authority" (or a "scholarship) which she never claimed

They endeavored to minimize the only SOURCE on which reliance
could be placed, while those who were truly wise invariably
pointed to her as the Teacher to whom all alike should look.
This was Mr. Judge's attitude then; and others, who have followed
have found, and will find, where she pointed. Both can be
considered as true collaborators.

What is our present work ? Are we not striving to learn what
Theosophy can teach ? Are we not looking to be united in that
understanding ? If we try to assimilate the teachings of
Theosophy we will soon find that proofs are everywhere. Then,
differences of opinion are seen for what they are and gradually
vanish.

This is not to say that some new creed should arise, or that any
Dogmatism, or fundamentalism should flourish.  

But if a goodly number of us find that Theosophy is accurate, 
should we not speak of it as such and encourage each other to 
review individual findings and assure ourselves of that 
universality and exactitude ? The Path is open to all, but each 
has to find and tread it by his own will and self-choice.

Those who can read have the opportunity to look at all the
several editions (of The SECRET DOCTRINE ) that have been 
published, and decide for themselves which will be the most 
valuable and trustworthy. 

The "Kali-Yuga" moves swiftly, and in 125 years we have seen unroll
many of the conditions and trials that it took Christianity over a 
thousand years to witness unrolling.

A wise man once wrote: " The path of true Occultism and that of
immorality do not coincide. The Masters do not judge anyone, nor
can They "forgive" anyone for sins of omission and commission.
Masters have to use such material as exists. If anyone has
lapses, so much the worse for him and for the work. It should
also be remembered that so long as one is willing to stay in the
world for the work, he can. Each stays, or goes out in
accordance with the own desire. The door is never shut on him by
the Law..." [ F P - R C ]

Dallas