Theos-Talk Archives (February 2006 Message tt00106)

Dallas,

I asked Carlos:

"Does Carlos acknowledge that these are mistakes that the ULT/
Theosophy Company has committed?"

To this question, you apparently answered:

==========================================
Nonsense !

Carlos A  has nothing to do with this debate, which dried up in 2004.

Portions of this discussion are reprinted below.

He has nothing to do with Theosophy Company, and its publications.

The sole aim of the Theosophy Company is to make copies of original 
texts [ "Eye Doctrine" ] available to students.  It leaves those 
same students to seek for the imbedded "Heart Doctrine."

But this whole subject is being reopened for what purpose ?
====================================================================

But Dallas, my comments are VERY relevant in 2006 because Carlos has
seen fit to bring the general subject of tampering up again in his 
letter to Betty Bland, the president of the Wheaton TS.

I will requote part of what he said in his letter dated Jan 6, 2006 
to Betty Bland:

"In time I hope the Adyar TS will come to publicly
acknowledge and debate other mistakes it made.

"A few, selected examples:

"1.  The tampering with the first edition of The Secret Doctrine,
until the ULT published the first facsimile edition in 1925...."
[The Aquarian Theosophist, March 17, 2006.]

Now what is Carlos saying here?  

It would appear that Carlos believes that the Adyar TS has tampered 
with the SD and that is a MISTAKE.  He even wants the Adyar TS to 
publicly acknowledge this tampering and that this was a mistake.

Furthermore, we gather that the ULT did not tamper with the SD but 
in fact published the first facsimile edition of HPB's 1888 original 
SD in 1925.

Therefore I wanted to know if Carlos believed that the Theosophy 
Company committed a MISTAKE when they issued a "tampered" version of 
HPB's THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE.

Or as I phrased it in one of my postings:

If it [tampering] was wrong in the case involving THE SECRET 
DOCTRINE, then is it not wrong in the case of THE VOICE OF THE 
SILENCE?

Or as I phrased it in another posting:

What is sauce for the goose (Adyar TS/Theosophical Publishing House)
is sauce for the gander (ULT/Theosophy Co.)??

Should we hold both organizations/publishing companies to the
SAME standard when criticizing editions of HPB's writings issued
by these publishers/societies?

Now, Dallas, you say Carlos "has nothing to do with Theosophy 
Company, and its publications."

Well, so what?

I could ask with as much relevance:  does Carlos have anything to do 
with the Adyar TS and its publications???  

He has written of late that he is an associate now of the ULT, 
therefore I was simply asking, if he is not pleased with the 
tampering done to the SD by the Adyar TS, and has felt moved to even 
write at least one letter to Betty Bland inwhich this is one of the 
issues he wants her to think about, etc. etc, then does he approve 
or disapprove of the tampering done in the VOICE as published by the 
Theosophy Company?

Or does he have a double standard which in effect says:

"Well it is a MISTAKE for the Adyar TS to do this tampering and they 
should publicly acknowledge it and discuss it, etc. but well the 
Theosophy Company I don't hold to the same standard. It is okay for 
them to issue a version of HPB's mystical classic which has been 
tampered with."

Dallas, you also write:

"The sole aim of the Theosophy Company is to make copies of original 
texts [ "Eye Doctrine" ] available to students.  It leaves those 
same students to seek for the imbedded 'Heart Doctrine.' "

Well, Dallas this would be good if it was totally true.  

But the Theosophy Company did NOT reprint HPB's original 1889 text 
of the Voice but instead issued a version which has hundreds of 
changes to HPB's original text.  And no where in the printed volume 
is there a note or notice indicating that such editing or (to use 
the word Carlos used)"tampering" has been done. 

Based on my original postings years ago on this subject, it would 
appear that Jerome Wheeler and Peter Merriott later discovered that 
the Theosophy Company text of the VOICE has editing and corrections 
made not only by Judge, but also by Mead and Besant!

!!! 

So in light of the tampering done to the VOICE in said edition, are 
you yourself willing to admit that it was a mistake for the 
Theosophy Company to publish this volume and on top of it, not to 
alert readers that editing, changes, tampering (I used Carlos' 
word here) has been done.

Since you are a director on the board of the Theosophy Company, I 
would think that you have a responsibility to consider these issues 
I have brought up.

Maybe a typed note should be pasted on the title page of all 
remaining unsold copies of the Theosophy Company's edition of the 
VOICE which reads something like:

This edition embodies hundreds of changes made apparently by 
William, Q. Judge, G.R.S. Mead and Annie Besant.  This reprint is 
not a faithful copy of HPB's original edition and was not authorized 
by HPB.

So in light of the above, what does one make of what you yourself 
wrote several years ago:

"In U.L.T. I don't have t[o] worry -- the originals are
available on a reliable basis. . . . Personally I would
rather deal with H.P.Blavatsky's 'mistakes' than with those created 
by others who have had the temerity to believe they knew better than 
she did, and had the audacity to introduce changes which she did not
authorize. Strong language, but true if it is applicable."

Personally I don't like the tampering done to the text of the SD but 
I don't like the tampering done to the VOICE either.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc