Theos-Talk Archives (May 2006 Message tt00127)

BRAIN ACTIVITY IN SOME SCHOLARS  
 
 
Dear Friends, 
 
 
In her famous text “Why I Do Not Return to India”,  H. P. Blavatsky  evaluates  the actual level of  brain activity in the case of  some  “pandits” and “scholars” who believe that she “may have been a Russian Spy”.  The assessment can  apply to the  recent examples of  Daniel Calwell and John Algeo. 
 
H.P.B. says: 
 
“For the Russian spy theory, if it still finds credit in some idiotic  heads, has long ago disappeared, at any rate from the official brains of the Anglo-Indians.”
 
Let’s take a look now at the broader context of her  words:  
 
“As for myself, who can charge me with having acted like an impostor? with having,  for instance, taken one single pie from any living soul? With having ever asked for money, or even with having accepted it,  notwithstanding that I was repeatedly offered large sums! Those who, in spite of this, haven chosen to think otherwise, will have to explain what even my traducers of even the Padri class and the Psychical Research Society have been unable to explain to this day, viz., the motive for  such a fraud. They will have to explain why, instead of taking and making money, I gave away to the Society  every penny I earned by writing for  the papers, why at  the same time I nearly killed myself with overwork and incessant labour year after year, until my health gave way, so that but for my Master’s repeated help, I should have died long ago from the effects of such voluntary hard labour.  For the Russian spy theory, if it still finds credit in some idiotic  heads, has long ago disappeared, at any rate from the official brains of the Anglo-Indians.” (1) 
 
 
H.P.B. ends the text by mentioning “those few true Theosophists who have remained loyal throughout,  and bid defiance to all calumniators and  ambitious malcontents – both without and within the  Theosophical  Society”. 
 
She knew there were calumniators inside the movement.  Does  the problem date from her time, then? Yes, and it  includes many other times and places, too. 
 
In fact, the symbolic presence of a Judas among the twelve apostles of the New Testament represents a much  deeper and broader challenge than just  a personal problem to be faced by  Jesus. 
 
Loyalty to others –  as Shakespeare wrote in the Act I  of his  “Hamlet”  – depends on being loyal to oneself. 
 
Best regards,   Carlos Cardoso Aveline 
 
 
NOTE:
 
(1) “Why I Do Not Return To India”, H.P. Blavatsky, published in “Collected Writings”, TPH, volume  XII, 1980, pp. 161-162.  Also “Theosophy”, a monthly magazine, Los Angeles, USA,  May 1947, pp. 295-296.  Written in April 1890, the text was an Open Letter to all theosophists in India, published originally. 
De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Cópia:

Data:Thu, 04 May 2006 16:10:33 -0000

Assunto:Theos-World Letters of H.P. Blavatsky to V.S. Solovyoff

> Letters of H.P. Blavatsky to V.S. Solovyoff
>  
> In the book THE MODERN PRIESTESS OF ISIS , the author 
> V.S. Solovyoff gives transcriptions of many of the letters 
> he said H. P. Blavatsky wrote to him.
> 
> Now since Solovyoff turned against H.P.B. and characterized
> her in this book as a fraud, one might wonder if he has
> forged or tampered with any of H.P.B.'s supposed letters.
>  
> Take for example, the H.P.B. letter dated may 23, 1885 and 
> transcribed on pp. 122-127 in THE MODERN PRIESTESS.
> 
> Is this letter a complete forgery palmed off as genuine 
> H.P.B. or is it at least a letter that has been tampered 
> with. And should the historian or the student of H.P.B.'s 
> life place any stock in the letter or simply reject
> the letter as spurious HPB?
>  
> Some time ago a student of H.P.B. in correspondence with me
> said that this letter was obviously forged since H.P.B. 
> could never have written the words:
> 
> "[Franz Hartmann]...has turned our devoted [William Q.]
> Judge, when [Judge was] despatched [in 1884] by Olcott from Paris to
> Adyar, into our enemy." Quoted from V.S. Solovyoff's A MODERN
> PRIESTESS OF ISIS, p. 125.
> 
> The correspondent spent more than 1 page of text explaining 
> all about Judge and trying to show that HPB would could never 
> have written those words.  And since those words are obviously 
> a forgery than the whole letter must be a forgery and therefore 
> rejected.  Such was his reasoning.
> 
> But is there someway to verify or falsify whether these disputed 
> words of HPB are her words or not?
> 
> According to my correspondent it was obvious that HPB could never 
> have written what is in this letter, therefore these words are not 
> hers
> 
> But the fact is that there is at least one genuine letter 
> of HPB's that, in fact, confirms the accuracy of what 
> she allegedly said in the letter to Solovyoff.
> 
> I have quoted portions of the confirming letter at: 
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/32954
> 
> And if you carefully read, study and compare her letter 
> to Judge which is dated May 1, 1885 with the letter in 
> question, that is, her letter to Solovyoff dated May 23, 
> 1885, you can see that much of the subject matter in her 
> letter to Solovyff is confirmed in the letter she had 
> written to Judge himself only 3 weeks before.
> 
> It is this technique of comparing and contrasting
> genuine letters of HPB with the disputed Solovyoff letters that 
> can lead one to the conclusion that these letters of HPB to 
> Solovyoff are probably genuine.
>   
> In fact, if you take this technique of comparing what can 
> be learned of this TIME PERIOD thru letters, diary entries, 
> reminiscences of the time, etc. these supposed HPB letters to 
> Solovyoff seem to accurately portray either known historicl 
> facts and details or what HPB is known to have written elsewhere.
> 
> And an observation that should also be made is that if Solovyoff
> was actually forging these HPB letters, why didn't he include 
> something that would be really damaging such as a confession from
> her that she had faked the Mahatma letters or the Masters or
> her psychic phenomena.  
> 
> Now Solovyoff in his narrative does claim that she VERBALLY told 
> him certain things that would show her as a fraud but in her letters 
> as transcribed in MODERN PRIESTESS OF ISIS, such admissions are 
> not there. (There is one letter of hers to Solovyoff known as her
> "Confession" letter which might be construed in a negative way but 
> as several authors have pointed out: this negative "interpretation" 
> doesn't hold up on a close reading of the letter in question.")
> 
> In other words, if Solovyoff was lying about HPB (as shown for 
> example in Beatrice Hasting's book SOLOVYOFF'S FRAUD), then 
> one can see that it was easier for him to simply makeup 
> stories and put words in HPB'S mouth rather than to actually 
> forge letters from her.
>   
> Solovyoff's book is a valuable historical record but of course 
> one needs to use some of the material with caution.  Certainly 
> persons interested in the relationship between Solovyoff and 
> Blavatsky should read other material that helps one to understand 
> these events.
> 
> Some of the works that should be consulted are:
> 
> (1)Cranston's HPB biography (the chapter on Solovyoff)
> (2)Beatrice Hasting's "Solovyoff's Fraud"
> (3) K.F. Vania's book on HPB
> (3)the valuable appendix A in MODERN PRIESTESS which is a
> partial translation of HPB's sister Vera's defense pamphlet 
> in answer to Solovyoff's book.
> 
> And several other books and documents.
> 
> It should be noted that Boris de Zirkoff, the compiler of HPB's
> Collected Writings, even uses material in Solovyoff's book to
> document various events in the "Chronological Survey" of HPB's life 
> for the years 1884, 1885 and 1886.  
> 
> See Vol. VI of HPB's COLLECTED WRITINGS
>  
> Now on Theos-Talk Carlos Aveline has almost constantly been reciting 
> the mantra of slanders, lies, falsehoods about both the Solovyoff and
> Coulomb books.  And certainly one must use these books with caution 
> especially since both authors turned against H.P.B.
> 
> But to throw the baby out with the bathwater, that is, to completely 
> ignore these books seems equally foolish since these books do 
> contain valuable historical data.
> 
> Again Carlos also wants to characterize anyone who uses this 
> material as somehow the "enemy" of HPB and Theosophy. His favorite 
> words apparently are: "slander" and "slanderer"
> 
> I shall post some interesting questions about these words in another 
> post addressed to Frank R.
> 
> Daniel
> http://hpb.cc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra.
> Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite
> http://mail.terra.com.br/protected_email/imail/imail.cgi?+_u=carlosaveline&_l=1,1146759233.358860.29108.alcuta.terra.com.br,8691,Des15,Des15
> 
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 03/05/2006 / Versão: 4.4.00/4754
> Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/
> 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]