Theos-Talk Archives (October 2005 Message tt00141)

Dallas,

You wrote to me:

=============================================
As I am given to understand the HPB COMMENTS on
FRAGMENTS OF OCCULT TRUTH were in the shape of her
editorial footnotes to the Hume articles, have you
contrary or different information?

These "comments" do not appear to be Hume's writing,
are you sure?

Do they ring unclear, or different from the
philosophy? To me, they read and
sound like HPB.

This is the first time I read of a possible editoring
in 1895 (Modern Panarion) by Mead.

I noted that our friend Mr. M. Gomes has rendered that
opinion concerning the articles.. What had or has he
to say about the editorial "Comments?"

I will also ask him by means of a copy of this note.
==================================================

Dallas, 

Ok, I see how I was somewhat puzzled and confused and
now understand (I think) what you mean by "comments".

If you are referring ONLY to the 5 or 6 "footnotes" to
these 3 articles when you use the word "Comments" then
yes at least 5 of them if not all of them are by
H.P.B. since five of them are signed either ED. THEOS.
or ED. And I would assume she is the one referred to
as Editor. But the last footnote in the 3rd article
is unsigned and that may mean that it is actually by
A.O. Hume. 

I give BELOW just the 6 footnotes. You will notice
that these 6 notes or "comments" (if you want to call
them that) take up very little text as compared to the
actual 3 articles which were written by A.O. Hume.

That is, the actual text of these three articles
(disregarding the five or six footnotes) was written
by Hume.

And yes the text of these articles as found in MODERN
PANARION is edited (for example, abridged, if not
more). 

And I posted years ago probably on Theos-Talk my
discovery that many of the other articles in MODERN
PANARION are edited. Material omitted, abridged. 
Words changed, etc. etc.

The 6 footnotes are below.

Also Dallas please forward these comments of mine if
you would to Michael.

Daniel

===========================================
(1) Western Science, of course, as a rule, holds that
animals have no conscious Ego, but this we know to be
erroneous; they possess no spiritual, but they do
possess an animal, consciousness. Could men
communicate with them, they would discover not only
this, but also that many of the anthropoid apes
possess an intelligence, consciousness &c., little
inferior to that of lunatics and madmen, and some
desperately wicked and depraved men who have, in fact,
become animals, through the loss, temporary or
permanent, of their sixth and seventh principles, even
while the combination of the other five principles is
still intact, i.e., even during life. 

Was it some hazy tradition of the truth handed down
through the Romish Church, which has ever possessed
some secret knowledge of the teachings of the ancient
mysteries, or was it the great Poet Soul’s own
glimpses into the Astral Light, that made Dante
represent the souls of several of his enemies as
already in the “Inferno” though the men themselves
still lived upon earth? Of course, the fragment of
truth thus embodied, was utterly distorted by the
malign influence of the then prevalent material Hell
superstition --- but it was quite possible, as the
Modern West has still to realize, that the souls of
some of these evil men might have already passed away
(though not to the fabled Inferno), whilst the men
themselves still lived. --- ED. THEOS. [H.P.
Blavatsky.]

(1) We object to this definition. Theosophy means
divine or God-Wisdom. ED.[of The Theosophist, H.P.
Blavatsky.]

(2) As in any case, say - of an initiated adept, -
who brings back upon earth with him the clear and
distinct recollection - correct to a detail - of facts
gathered, and the information obtained in the
invisible sphere of Realities. - ED. [of The
Theosophist, H.P. Blavatsky.]

(3) Those real, genuine adepts who neither thrust
themselves upon the public notice, nor do they invite
us at the top of their voices: - "Come all ye, poor
ignorant fools, come to me ... come to learn from me
who has nothing more to learn since he has made
himself omniscient - how to reach "Christ-State" and
Buddha-State ..." - Our adepts compare themselves
neither with Christ nor Buddha; nor even with Ammonius
Sakka - the THEODIDAKTOS or the "God-Taught" Seer; but
they may be all that combined, and much more, since
they are a Body of men - not one isolated, self-taught
individual. - ED. [of The Theosophist, H.P.
Blavatsky.]

(4) The few exceptional cases of genuine
spirit-communications will be treated of, in one of
the future parts of "Fragments" - as the greatest
attention and caution must be bestowed upon the
subject to avoid every possible misunderstanding.
Before we rebuild a house, we have to pull dow the old
structure. We know that we shall displease many and
receive no thanks for it. But it cannot be helped. The
Spiritualists having insisted upon having our opinion,
we must be left to proceed systematically. - ED. [of
The Theosophist, H.P. Blavatsky.]

(1) Allan Kardec is probably the one untrained
experimenter, who has got nearest the truth, and this
because he generalized from such a vast mass of
communications by very carefully picked sensitives and
did thus eliminate a vast amount of error