Theos-Talk Archives (July 2005 Message tt00063)

July 9 2005

Friends:

On the subject of the Mahatma's writings here are some facts offered to
consider:



MAHATMA'S WRITINGS -- What They have Said.


The question arose concerning The method used by the Adepts in drawing
together the material They and HPB used to answer questions; or in writing
books like ISIS UNVEILED and the SECRET DOCTRINE as well as many articles.


The Mahatma ... wrote:  


"You have seen by the Kiddle incident...that even an "adept" when acting in
his body is not beyond mistakes due to human carelessness...all thro' lack
of simple caution. There is always that danger if one has neglected to
ascertain whether the words or sentences rushing into the mind have come all
from 'within' or whether some may have been impressed from 'without.'...I
had no time to verify their contents--nor do I now.  

I have a habit of often quoting, 'minus' quotation marks--from the maze of
what I get in the countless folios of our Akasic libraries, so to say--with
eyes shut. Sometimes I may give out thoughts that will see light years
later; at other times what an orator, a Cicero may have pronounced ages
earlier, and at others, what was only pronounced by modern lips but already
either written or printed--as in the Kiddle case.  

All this I do (not being a trained writer for the Press) without the
smallest concern as to where the sentences and strings of words may have
come from, so long as the serve to express, and fit in with my own
thoughts." [ML 324]

The "Kiddle" incident concerned a man of that name who, after reading
Sinnett's THE OCCULT WORLD, claimed that some of the passages that Mr.
Sinnett quoted from the Mahatma's letters were originally his.

Reverting to this subject of plagiarism, we find the Mahatma saying in some
detail:  


"I am accused of "plagiarism.". We of Tibet and China know not what you
mean by the word, I do, but this is no reason, perhaps, why I should accept
your literary laws. Any writer has the privilege of taking out whole
sentences from the dictionary of "PAI-WOUEN-YEN-FU" the greatest in the
world, full of quotations from every known writer, and containing all the
phrases ever used--and to frame them to express his thought. This does not
apply to the Kiddle case which happened just as I told you. But you may
find, perchance throughout my letters twenty detached sentences which may
have been already used in books or MSS.  

When you write upon some subject you surround yourself with books of
references etc.: when we write upon something the Western opinion about
which is unknown to us, we surround ourselves with hundred of paras: upon
this particular topic from dozens of different works--impressed upon the
Akasa.  

What wonder then, that...even myself--should use occasionally a whole
sentence already existent, applying it to another--our own idea? I have
told you of this before and it is no fault of mine if your friends and
enemies will not remain satisfied with the explanation...For the 'Kiddle'
business it is your own fault. Why have you printed the OCCULT WORLD before
sending it to me for revision? I would have never allowed the passage to
pass...'We are not infallible, all-foreseeing "Mahatmas" at every hour of
the day,' good friend...." [ML 364]


Writing in another letter to his correspondent on some of the pearls of
wisdom that might occasionally be discovered by readers despite the unshaped
and unpolished style and appearance of the early issues of the THEOSOPHIST,
He comments (in part): 


"But let your attention be rather drawn to the few pearls of wisdom and
'occult truths' to be occasionally discovered...And who knows, how many of
those, who, undismayed by its unprepossessing appearance...may find
themselves rewarded some day for their perseverance ! Illuminated sentences
may gleam out upon them, at some time or other, shedding a bright light upon
some old puzzling problems ...yourself you may, perchance, perceive in them
the unexpected solution of an old, blurred "dream" of yours, which once
'recalled' will impress itself in an indelible image upon your 'outer' from
your inner memory, to never fade out from it again. all this is possible,
and may happen..." [ ML 278 ]  


Is this not a broad hint as to the value of the "Heart" doctrine? And, its
relation to the literal dry word-transmission -- then, it is left for the
disciple to uncover from such texts these keys to his own innate soul memory
?

The matter of picking up words and ideas was asked about by Mr. Sinnett, and
evoked this response:  


"Quotation from Tennyson? Really cannot say. Some stray lines picked up in
the astral light or in somebody's brain and remembered, I never forget what
I once see or read. A bad habit. So much so, that often and unconsciously
to myself I string together sentences of stray words and phrases, before my
eyes and which may have been used hundred years ago, or will be hundred
years hence, in relation to quite a different subject. Laziness and real
lack of time." 
[ML 286]


Reviewing, and criticizing some of the writing in ISIS UNVEILED, He wrote: 


"If M. told you to beware trusting ISIS too implicitly, it was because he
was 'teaching you truth and fact'--and that at the time the passage was
written we had not yet decided upon teaching the public
indiscriminately...Many are the subjects treated upon in ISIS that even HPB
was not allowed to become thoroughly acquainted with; yet they are not
contradictory if -- "misleading." To make her say -- that the passage
criticized was "incomplete, chaotic, vague. . .clumsy as many more passages
in that work" was a sufficiently "frank admission" I should think, to
satisfy the most crotchety critic. To admit "that the passage was wrong,"
on the other hand, would have amounted to a useless falsehood, for I
'maintain' that it is 'not' wrong; since it conceals the 'whole' truth, it
does not distort it in the fragments of that truth as given in ISIS." [ML
182]


We are thus given an idea and an explanation concerning the possibility of
copying stray phrases and words from various authors. Obviously the
intention has never been to steal those or use them for any other purpose
than accuracy of expression.

In an earlier letter : "She (HPB) states in many places that she was
writing on behalf of (or even under the dictation of) the Masters of Wisdom,
whether one "believes" in them or not -- Olcott and Wachmeister (among
others) make corroborating reports of this, and she says so repeatedly. [
They (the Masters), have authenticated this fact to Dr. Hubbe-Schleiden--see
PATH magazine, April 1892, Vol. 8, pp. 1-3 ]. She also says that much if
not all she wrote, was supervised or reviewed by them. She does say in
regard to ISIS that the proof-readers made errors...Her writing might be
criticized, as she did herself, and her own critique ought to be offered for
the consideration of the reader. 

I bring this forward as otherwise it might leave the impression that the
Mahatmas connived or were also guilty of "plagiarism" or of "stealing"
another's words, or of condoning such a practice habitually. They speak for
themselves.

In regard to herself, HPB wrote:


[The following is the greater part of a letter written by H. P.
Blavatsky some years ago at a time when, subsequent to the Psychical
Research Society's Report on Theosophical phenomena, not only the public but
fellow members of the Society were doubting her, doubting themselves,
doubting the Adepts. Its publication now will throw upon her character a
light not otherwise obtainable. Written to an intimate and old friend for
his information and benefit, it bears all the indicia of being out of the
heart from one old friend to another. Those who have faith in her and in the
Masters behind her will gain benefit and knowledge from its perusal.]

Now what you advise me to do, I have for the last three or four years
attempted most seriously. Dozens of times I have declared that I shall not
put the Masters any worldly questions or submit before Them family and other
private matters, personal for the most part. I must have sent back to the
writers dozens and dozens of letters addressed to the Masters, and many a
time have I declared I will not ask Them so and so. Well, what was the
consequence? People still worried me. "Please, do please, ask the Masters,
only ask and tell Them and draw Their attention to" so-and-so. When I
refused doing it _____ would come up and bother, or _____, or someone else.
Now it so happens that you do not seem to be aware of the occult law - to
which even the Masters are subject Themselves - whenever an intense desire
is concentrated on Their personalities: whenever the appeal comes from a man
of even an average good morality, and all the desire is intense and sincere
even in matters of trifles (and to Them what is not a trifle?): They are
disturbed by it, and the desire takes a material form and would haunt Them
(the word is ridiculous, but I know of no other) if They did not create an
impassable barrier, an Akasic wall between that desire (or thought, or
prayer) and so isolate Themselves. The result of this extreme measure is
that They find Themselves isolated at the same time from all those who
willingly or unwillingly, consciously or otherwise, are made to come within
the circle of that thought or desire. I do not know whether you will
understand me; I hope you will. And finding Themselves cut off from me, for
instance, many were the mistakes made and damages realized that could have
been averted had. They not often found Themselves outside the circle of
theosophical events. Such is the case ever since . . . , throwing Their
names right and left, poured in torrents on the public, so to say, Their
personalities, powers, and so on, until the world (the outsiders, not only
Theosophists) desecrated Their names indeed from the North to the South
Pole. Has not the Maha Chohan put His foot on that from the first? Has He
not forbidden Mahatma K. H. to write to anyone? (Mr. _____ knows well all
this.) And have not since then waves of supplications, torrents of desires
and prayers poured unto Them? This is one of the chief reasons why Their
names and personalities ought to have been kept secret and inviolable. They
were desecrated in every possible way by believer and unbeliever, by the
former when he would critically and from his worldly standpoint examine Them
(the Beings beyond and outside every worldly if not human law!), and when
the latter positively slandered, dirtied, dragged Their names in the mud! O
powers of heaven! what I have suffered - there are no words to express it.
This is my chief, my greatest crime, for having brought Their personalities
to public notice unwillingly, reluctantly, and forced into it by ____ and
____ .

Well, now to other things. You and the Theosophists have come to the
conclusion that in every case where a message was found couched in words or
sentiments unworthy of Mahatmas it was produced either by elementals or my
own falsification. Believing the latter, no honest man or woman ought for
one moment to permit me, such a FRAUD, to remain any longer in the Society.
It is not a piece of repentance and a promise that I shall do so no longer
that you need, but to kick me out - if you really think so. You believe, you
say, in the Masters, and at the same time you can credit the idea that They
should permit or even know of it and still use me! Why, if They are the
exalted Beings you rightly suppose Them to be, how could They permit or
tolerate for one moment such a deception and fraud? Ah, poor Theosophists -
little you do know the occult laws I see. And here and others are right.
Before you volunteer to serve the Masters you should learn Their philosophy,
for otherwise you shall always sin grievously, though unconsciously and
involuntarily, against Them and those who serve Them, soul and body and
spirit. Do you suppose for one moment that what you write to me now I did
not know for years? Do you think that any person even endowed with simple
sagacity, let alone occult powers, could ever fail to perceive each time
suspicion when there was one, especially when it generated in the minds of
honest, sincere people, unaccustomed to and incapable of hypocrisy? It is
just that which killed me, which tortured and broke my heart inch by inch
for years, for I had to bear it in silence and had no right to explain
things unless permitted by Masters, and They commanded me to remain silent.
To find myself day after day facing those I loved and respected best between
the two horns of the dilemma - either to appear cruel, selfish, unfeeling by
refusing to satisfy their hearts' desire, or, by consenting to it, to run
the chance (9 out of 10) that they shall immediately feel suspicions lurking
in their minds, for the Master's answers and notes ("the red and blue
spook-like messages," as ____ truly calls them) were sure in their eyes -
again 9 times out of 10 - to be of that spook character. Why? Was it fraud?
Certainly not. Was it written by and produced by elementals? NEVER. It was
delivered and the physical phenomena are produced by elementals used for the
purpose, but what have they, those senseless beings, to do with the
intelligent portions of the smallest and most foolish message? Simply this,
as this morning before the receipt of your letter, at 6 o'clock, I was
permitted and told by Master to make you understand at last - you - and all
the sincere, truly devoted Theosophists: as you sow, so you will reap. . . .


It is ALL YOU, Theosophists, who have dragged down in your minds the
ideals of our MASTERS, you who have unconsciously and with the best of
intentions and full sincerity of good purpose DESECRATED Them by thinking
for one moment and believing that THEY would trouble Themselves with your
business matters, sons to be born, daughters to be married, houses to be
built, etc., etc. And yet, all those who have received such communications
being nearly all sincere (those who were not have been dealt with according
to other special laws), you had a right, knowing of the existence of Beings
who you thought could easily help you, to seek help from Them, to address
Them, once that a monotheist addresses his personal God, desecrating the
GREAT UNKNOWN a million of times above the Masters - by asking Him (or IT)
to help him with a good crop, to slay his enemy, and send him a son or
daughter; and having such a right in the absolute sense, They could not
spurn you off and refuse answering you, if not Themselves, then by ordering
a Chela to satisfy the addressers to the best of his or hers [the chela's]
ability. How many a time was I - no Mahatma - shocked and startled, burning
with shame when shown notes from Chelas exhibiting mistakes in science,
grammar, and thoughts expressed in such language that it perverted entirely
the meaning originally intended, and having sometimes expressions that in
Thibetan, Sanscrit, or any other Asiatic language had quite a different
sense. As in one instance I will give.

In answer to Mr._____ 's letter referring to some apparent contradiction
in His. The Chela who was made to precipitate Mahatma K. H.'s reply put, "I
had to exercise all my ingenuity to reconcile the two things." Now the term
"ingenuity" used for and meaning candor, fairness, an obsolete word in this
sense and never used now, but one meaning this perfectly, as even I find in
Webster, was misconstrued by Massey, Hume, and I believe even _____ to mean
"cunning," "cleverness," "acuteness" to form a new combination so as to
prove there was no contradiction. Hence: the Mahatma was made apparently to
confess most unblushingly to ingenuity, to using craft to reconcile things
like an acute "tricky lawyer," etc., etc. Now had I been commissioned to
write or precipitate the letter I would have translated the Master's thought
by using the word "ingenuousness," "openness of heart, frankness, fairness,
freedom from reserve and dissimulation," as Webster gives it, and opprobrium
thrown on Mahatma K. H.'s character would have been avoided. It is not I who
would have used "carbolic acid" instead of "carbonic acid," etc. It is very
rarely that Mahatma K. H. dictated verbatim, and when He did there remained
the few sublime passages found in Mr. Sinnett's letters from Him. The rest -
he would say - write so-and-so, and the Chela wrote often without knowing a
word of English, as I am now made to write Hebrew and Greek and Latin, etc.
Therefore the only thing I can be reproached with - a reproach I am ever
ready to bear tho' I have not deserved it, having been simply the obedient
and blind tool of our occult laws and regulations - is of having concealed
that which the laws and regulations of my pledges did not permit me so far
to reveal. I owned myself several times mistaken in policy, and now am
punished for it with daily and hourly crucifixion.

Pick up stones, Theosophists; pick them up, brothers and kind sisters,
and stone me to death with them for such mistakes.

Two or three times, perhaps more, letters were precipitated in my
presence by a Chela who could not speak English and who took ideas and
expressions out of my head. The phenomena in truth and solemn reality were
greater at those times than ever. Yet they often appeared the most
suspicious, and I had to hold my tongue, to see suspicion creeping into the
minds of those I loved best and respected, unable to justify myself or say
one word! What I suffered Master alone knew. Think only (a case with
Solovioff's at _____) I sick in my bed: a letter of his, an old letter
received in London and torn up by me, rematerialized in my own sight, I
looking at the thing. Five or six lines in the Russian language in Mahatma
K. H.'s handwriting in blue, the words taken from my head, the letter old
and crumpled travelling slowly alone (even I could not see the astral hand
of the Chela performing the operation) across the bedroom, then slipping
into and among Solovioff's papers who was writing in the little drawing-room
correcting my manuscript, Olcott standing closely by him and having just
handled the papers, looking over them with Solovioff, the latter finding it,
and like a flash I see in his head in Russian the thought "The old impostor
(meaning Olcott) must have put it there"! - and such things by hundreds.

Well - this will do. I have told you the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth, so far as I am allowed to give it. Many are the
things I have no right to explain if I had to be hung for it. Now think for
one moment. Suppose _____ receives an order from his Master to precipitate a
letter to the _____ family, only a general idea being given to him about
what he has to write. Paper and envelope are materialized before him, and he
has only to form and shape the ideas into his English and precipitate them.
What shall the result be? Why his English, his ethics and philosophy - his
style all round. "A fraud, a transparent FRAUD!" people would cry out, and
if any one happened to see such a paper before him or in his possession
after it was formed, what should be the consequences?

Another instance - I cannot help it, it is so suggestive. A man, now
dead, implored me for three days to ask Master's advice on some business
matter, for he was going to become a bankrupt and dishonor his family. A
serious thing. He gave me a letter for Master "to send on." I went into the
back parlor and he went down stairs to wait for the answer.

Now to send on a letter two or three processes are used: (1) To put the
envelope sealed on my forehead, and then, warning the Master to be ready for
a communication, have the contents reflected by my brain carried off to His
perception by the current formed by Him. This, if the letter is in a
language I know; otherwise, if in an unknown tongue, (2) to unseal it, read
it physically with my eyes, without understanding even the words, and that
which my eyes see is carried off to Master's perception and reflected in it
in His own language, after which, to be sure, no mistake is made. I have to
burn the letter with a stone I have (matches and common fire would never
do), and the ashes caught by the current become more minute than atoms would
be, and are rematerialized at any distance where Master was.

Well, I put the letter on the forehead opened, for it was in a language
of which I know not one word, and when Master had seized its contents I was
ordered to burn and send it on. It so happened that I had to go in my
bedroom and get the stone there from a drawer it was locked in. That minute
I was away, the addresser, impatient and anxious, had silently approached
the door, entered the drawing-room, not seeing me there, and seen his own
letter opened on the table. He was horror-struck, he told me later,
disgusted, ready to commit suicide, for he was a bankrupt not only in
fortune, but all his hopes, his faith, his heart's creed were crushed and
gone. I returned, burnt the letter, and an hour after gave him the answer,
also in his language. He read it with dull staring eyes, but thinking, as he
told me, that if there were no Masters I was a Mahatma, did what he was
told, and his fortune and honor were saved. Three days later he came to me
and frankly told me all - did not conceal his doubts for the sake of
gratitude, as others did - and was rewarded. By order of the Master I showed
him how it was done and he understood it. Now had he not told me, and had
his business gone wrong, advice notwithstanding, would not he have died
believing me the greatest imposter on earth?

So it goes.

It is my heart's desire to be rid forever of any phenomena but my own
mental and personal communication with Masters. I shall no more have
anything to do whatever with letters or phenomenal occurrences. This I swear
on Masters' Holy Names, and may write a circular letter to that effect.

Please read the present to all, even to _____. FINIS all, and now
Theosophists who will come and ask me to tell them so and so from Masters,
may the Karma fall on their heads. I AM FREE. Master has just promised me
this blessing !!

Path, March, 1893 H. P. Blavatsky 
 













Dallas