Theos-Talk Archives (May 2005 Message tt00774)

Monday, May 9, 2005

--------,

Thanks for your two most recent emails.

Before I respond specifically to some of your
comments in those emails, I want to try to give
you just a little insight into my thinking about
HPB's esoteric papers.

The reality of the situation is that in 1897 
Mrs. Annie Besant published the BULK...yes the great BULK of HPB's 
3 instructions and Inner Group teachings in the third volume of
THE SECRET DOCTRINE.

This volume has been reprinted probably 6 or 7 times
in the last 108 years. Even published in the 1980s as
a Quest Book by Wheaton TPH.

Therefore during these 108 years probably thousands
of readers, inquirers, seekers and Theosophical students
have read these esoteric papers of Madame Blavatsky in this
third volume of the SD.

And probably the vast majority of readers and students
who were introduced to this material in this third volume
had no idea that these were possibly still private and confidential
papers that should never have been published.

Read Annie Besant's note about these
papers to be found on page 434 of the third volume:

"Papers I. II. III. of the following were written by H.P.B and 
were circulated privately during her lifetime, but they were 
written with the idea that they would be published after a time. 
. . . . The 'Notes of some Oral Teaching' were written down by 
some of her pupils and were partially corrected by her, 
but no attempt has been made to relieve them of their 
fragmentary character. She had intended to make them 
the basis for written papers similar to the first three, 
but her failing health rendered this impossible, and 
they are published with her consent, the time for restricting 
them to a limited circle having expired."

Notice her words: "...they are published with her [HPB's] consent."

I'm not asking YOU to believe what Mrs. Besant said. But my
point is that thousands of readers have probably read these words
of Mrs. Besant and simply assumed they were true. 

Without knowing more about the inner history of the Esoteric School, 
how would any of the readers be in a position to know whether Mrs. 
Besant was telling the truth or not???

But the end result is that many very serious students of Madame
Blavatsky's teachings have found a great deal of food for thought, 
insight and inspiration in those teachings as given in Vol. III of 
the SD.

More than 25 years ago I remember studying this material and I 
believe I learned a great deal and even had a few of those insights 
for myself.

It was only LATER as I delved more deeply into the history of the
Theosophical movement that I discovered that some Theosophical 
students questioned Mrs. Besant's assurances, etc. etc.

So if every student and reader who ever read and studied the 
esoteric papers as given in Vol. III had also found out later that 
possibly these papers were not suppose to be ever published, what 
pray tell should they do?

Are they suppose to erase from their minds all the study and insight 
and inspiration that they may have gained from these pages in Volume 
III?

How and why do you close the barn door after all the horses have 
already run away?

The bottom line is that the papers are out there and have been in 
the public domain for 108 years.

Probably somewhere in the world as I type these words, some inquirer 
or new student has purchased a copy of this volume III and is 
starting to read these esoteric papers of HPB's.

Moving on.

Later I also discovered allegations that Mrs. Besant had edited
and changed some of the text of these esoteric papers. Since I 
believed these papers were important and part of Mme. Blavatsky's
literary heritage, I wanted to know more about these allegations of
tampering and editing. 

Why? I thought if Mrs. Besant has tampered with these papers then 
maybe some of my own understanding and insight may be wrong because
of this changing/editing of words which may also change HPB's 
original meaning.

Naturally I wanted to see the originals so that I would not be 
laboring under misimpressions based on Mrs. Besant's alleged editing.

If you had been in my shoes, you may have thought differently. I 
don't know but my intent was to ascertain and preserve the unedited 
versions of these papers so that other sincere, serious students 
might also correct any misunderstandings they had.

Now after many years I have published THE ESOTERIC PAPERS OF MADAME 
BLAVATSKy.

See: http://blavatskyarchives.com/hpbesotericpapers.htm

Again the uppermost thought in my mind has been to set the record 
straight, to preserve for posterity the original, unedited versions 
of HPB's estoric papers. If this creates negative karma, then I will 
bear with it for in the long run I think it is productive of much 
good.....

As time went on, I also discovered that after HPB's death all sorts 
of claims have been made by Judge, Besant, Leadbeater and many, many 
other individuals about HPB's teachings and also claims of further 
communication with the dead HPB and with HPB's adept teachers. 

See a list of some of those claimants at:
http://blavatskyarchives.com/latermessengers.htm#six

All these claims and counterclaims constitute a morass that every 
new student and inquirers has to face and deal with IF they are even 
aware of some if not all of these conflicting claims.

As I studied more deeply I was fortunate to find more material, for 
example, the Wurzburg manuscript of the SD, that is, the original 
volumes I and II and the study of this manuscript threw a floodlight 
on the origins of Volume III of the SD.

See some of my conclusions at:
http://blavatskyarchives.com/sdiiipt1.htm

or my other discovery as detailed at:
Missing "Transactions" by H.P. Blavatsky Discovered
http://blavatskyarchives.com/caldwellunpublavmat.htm

As my studies progressed, it dawned on me that most students, even 
serious students, of Madame Blavatsky's writings and teachings and 
life labor under many handicaps and hindrances.

Much of the relevant material is scattered all over and most 
students simply do have have easy access if any access to reams of 
relevant documents.

This is why I created the Blavatsky Archives on the WWW. I wanted 
to share all of this material that I had been fortunate enough to 
find and track down with other sincere students. You can see some 
of this material online at:
http://blavatskyarchives.com/compitems2.htm

And I have thousand of other documents which I hope in time will 
also be put online for students.

Starting in the early seventies I was a student of the Mahatma 
Letters to A.P. Sinnett. In studying and researching these 
remarkable letters, I found tons of relevant material that 
illuminated these letters.

Having a background in psychology and parapsychology, these Mahatma 
letters from KH on life after death opened up whole new vistas and 
insights for me.

And at the same time I was able to discover more relevants letters 
from the Masters which solve all sorts of mysteries, etc. 
surrounding the early days of Theosophy. Some of this material I 
have published at:

http://blavatskyarchives.com/hollowayml.htm

As the years have gone by and more and more of this material has 
come my way I have felt it a DUTY to preserve this material and to 
make it available to the public in the hope that sincere and serious 
students will find this material helpful as they try to discover 
genuine theosophy as opposed to all the pseudo-Theosophy
out there to confuse and mislead.

In the last year to my surprise I discovered more than a dozen 
original letters from the Masters KH and M. I feel a duty to 
preserve and eventually put them in the public domain.

If they have helped me to some extent, then I should share them with 
others.

In the last year I was able to provide Kessinger Publishing with 
original copies of the first 14 volumes of THE THEOSOPHIST and also 
certain volumes of LUCIFER. I was able to make a deal with 
Kessinger to publish all these volumes. Now serious students of 
Blavatsky can read her articles unedited and uncensored just
as she published them in her magazines. This project has cost me 
several thousand dollars but I was so happy that this printing 
project could be done.

Along the way I have also discovered many unfortunate things such as 
that the Collected Writings series of HPB articles by Boris de 
Zirkoff contained editing of HPB's words. Although these Collected 
Writings are quite useful having amassed in 14 volumes most of HPB's 
volumious article, de Zirkoff's editing was unfortunate. This 
discovery motivated me to have the original volumes of THE 
THEOSOPHIST and Lucifer phototgraphically reprinted. 

I also discovered that the Theosophy Company's editions of THE VOICE 
OF THE SILENCE and MODERN PANARION contains hundreds of changes from 
HPB's originals and yet there was no indicaton in these reprints by 
the Theosophy Company that these volumes had been edited, in some 
cases heavily edited. I have also written about this.

I also discovered that many of so-called scholars who write books on 
Blavatsky and her Masters do NOT always give readers a fair and 
balanced look.

See my papers on Paul Johnson's books for examples of this:
http://blavatskyarchives.com/johnson.htm
http://blavatskyarchives.com/johnsonparanormal3.htm

I also rescued from near oblivion the original text of Margaret 
Thomas' study of Leadbeater's and Besant's Neo-Theosophy.

See:
http://blavatskyarchives.com/thomas/index.htm
http://blavatskyarchives.com/tontitlepage.pdf

Anand whom you have mentioned in one of your previous emails to me 
has NOT been happy with my publication of the Thomas material. You 
should see some of his emails to me!

I have also been able to publish rare material on:

William Q. Judge and Katherine A. Tingley:
An Analysis of the Controversy Surrounding 
W.Q. Judge's Diary Entries about "Promise" and the Dead H.P.B. 
including Material on the Close Relationship between Mr. Judge and 
Mrs. Tingley
http://blavatskyarchives.com/stokeswqjktcon.htm

Many Theosophical students especially some Judge and ULT students 
have also NOT been happy with me for publishing all this material 
especially some of the rare material written by Mr. Judge.

But if it makes them think, challenges their own assumptions and 
views, then all the negative emails I have received on the subject 
was worth it!

I have rambled on but all the above may help you to understand where 
I am coming from.

Now to your latest email.

You write:

"The problem here is that you think that by adding together letters 
and extracts, which should not be in your hands to begin with, that 
you have proved something."

I focus on your words:

"...letters and extracts, which should not be in your
hands to begin with...."

Well, how do you KNOW that they should not be in my hands?
This may be your sincere opinion but you really do NOT know anything
about how these letters and extracts came my way, etc.

"...should not...." This reminds me of some of the doctrinaire 
statements made for example by Anand.

And yes I do believe that these letters and extracts do prove 
certain things. At least I offer evidence and I have seen little if 
any of that in what you have provided me.

You also write:

"I just thought that since you seemed intent on dealing with Anand, 
and the support of HPB, that you would be able to understand my 
reasoning, but I was mistaken."

Well I believe that I have at least partially understood your 
reasoning but that does NOT mean I have to agree with it, does it? 
And to be truthful you have written very little about your reasoning 
on this matter. So if I do not understand it fully part of the
reason may be that you have not clearly elucidated all of your 
reasoning.

You go on:

"Now I see that your method is to meet any such
complaint as mine, not with reason, but with more and
more publishing of the very thing objected to, as if
doing that proves anything but your tenacity to your
mind set."

No doubt, no doubt, I have a "mind set" but are you telling
me that you do not have one also? Or that you are free of
the tenacity of your mind set?

I constantly try to remind myself that I may not see the whole 
picture, that I may be seriously mistaken on this that or the 
other. And I believe that I am open to new points of view, new 
evidence, etc.

Are you?

I don't mean to be unkind but I intend to be frank and 
straightforward: many of your statements seem very similar in tone 
to those of Anand Gholap. He knows and anyone who thinks 
differently is wrong. I may be mistaken but I detect that same tone 
in your emails. Plus also in your words almost a whiff of 
"irritation." 

And my publishing of certain extracts from the esoteric papers of 
HPB was made in the hope that you would see where I was coming 
from...that you might gather what my reasoning was.

Then to your comment which reads:

"Finally, To the diserning mind, Mr Corsbie's authority to do what 
he has done, is obviously something you are in no position to 
understand."

I assume you believe that you are one of those with a "discerning 
mind" and obviously I am not!

But this statement of yours is almost identical to some of the 
responses I have received over the years from indignant 
Leadbeaterites and Baileyites, etc. who have not liked my 
questioning of their favorite author and hero.

One could simply reword what you have written and it could have been 
written by those individuals:

"To the discerning mind, Leadbeater's authority to do what he has 
done, is obviously something you are in no position to understand."

or 

"To the discerning mind, Bailey's authority to do what he has 
done, is obviously something you are in no position to understand."

How do you KNOW what I am able to understand or not?? 

In my main archives in Oceanside, California I have 2 drawers of a 
filing cabinet of Mr. Crosbie's papers, etc. If I have any 
understanding or if I will have any understanding of Mr. Crosbie's 
authority etc, it will be based on the historical record which 
includes many letters actually written by Mr. Crosbie. What is your 
understanding based on?

I'm pretty sure that you will not share that with me so it is but 
a rhetorical question.

And I do thank you for deciding to write to me again. And I wish
that we could indeed be allies but you apparently want it all on your
terms and seem unwilling to compromise or to tolerate a different 
point of view. 

But your writing to me has been a sign to me to at last publish in a 
more detailed form the article titled:

"Did Robert Crosbie Break the Seventh Clause of His Solemn Pledge?"

which I will work on as time permits....

And so I ask you again to seriously ponder on these questions:
-------------------------------------------------------------
It is clear that Blavatsky & Judge issued the instructions at the
direction of the Masters.

But who gave the permission to Crosbie in 1909 that he could reprint
the esoteric instructions and allow new people to have access to
this esoteric material?

Who gave Mr. Crosbie the authority or right to disregard his
original pledges & offer these instructions to new students?

Did Mr Crosbie violate his original pledges by allowing other people
to have copies of Blavatsky's & Judge's esoteric instructions?

Relevant to this, I quote the following:

"Mr John Garrigues et al in one of the ULT histories of Modern
Theosophy did not hesitate to attack Mrs Annie Besant on the very
same issue.

"Read Mr Garrigues' words-----

'In Mrs. Besant's 'Third Volume' [of The Secret Doctrine, 1897] are
incorporated the private papers originally issued by H.P.B. to the
E.S., and in reprinting these Mrs. Besant . . . broke the seventh
clause of her solemn pledge as a member of the Esoteric
School. . . .' The Theosophical Movement 1875-1925, pages 571-572.

"If Mrs Besant was guilty of what Mr Garrigues accused her, then is
it not equally fair to at least pose the question-----

"Did not Mr Robert Crosbie violate his original 'solemn' E.S. pledge
by reissuing (through the DES) Blavatsky's esoteric instructions to
new students under an oath of secrecy?

"If Mrs Besant was guilty of breaking her pledge, why not also Mr
Crosbie?"

-----------------------------------------------------------------

But I assume you need not ponder more deeply since you already 
believe you know the truth.

Thanks for writing and I wish we could work more closely together 
since I assume we are both sincere and serious students of Madame 
Blavatksy's writing.

Daniel