Theos-Talk Archives (July 2006 Message tt00429)

Daniel,


There are mistakes and mistakes in any editorial work. 

The movement is made of imperfect workers. Boris work was just great, though not perfect.   I consider the facsimile editions of the SD ( Theosophy Co. and TUP) preferable, taking Boris' SD as an alternative source. 

The key issue in the movement is: do people respect facts as long as they know them?  Or do they insist in making propaganda of well-known LIES,  even after being warned about them?  


Best regards,  Carlos.  


De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Cópia:

Data:Thu, 20 Jul 2006 21:40:52 -0000

Assunto:Theos-World Bottom Line: both Besant & de Zirkoff editions of SD have been SILENTLY EDITED

> Carlos, you write:
> 
> "I am open to criticisms about anything, including Boris' work. But 
> Boris' enormous contribution to the movement is undeniable, as well 
> as the fact that his edition of "The Secret Doctrine" (which may not 
> be absolutely perfect) , is basicly reliable, and much better than 
> the Besant's one."
> 
> Who is questioning "Boris' enormous contribution to the movement"??
> 
> But THE FACT REMAINS that Boris' edition of HPB's SD has been 
> subjected to INVISIBLE EDITING or SILENT EDITING.
> 
> Again you say that Boris' edition is "much better than the Besant's 
> one."
> 
> Well, it all depends on what you consider "much better". What are 
> your critieria?
> 
> Considering only the SILENT EDITING issue, have you COMPARED all of 
> the silent editing in the de Zirkoff edition with all of the silent 
> editing in the Besant edition to be in a good position to really 
> judge if the de Zirkoff edition is "better" or "much better" than 
> the Besant edition.
> 
> MY POINT is that both have been SILENTLY EDITED or as Dallas calls it
> INVISIBLY EDITED.
> 
> And the general observations (see below) made by both Dallas T. and 
> Peter M. still apply to BOTH the Besant and De Zirkoff editions.
> 
> Here are Peter's words:
> 
> ===========================================================
> Speaking for myself, I would rather have HPB' writings as they were
> completed and published by her. I don't want somebody in-between 
> correcting the text according to his own ideas of what HPB *might* 
> have put if she had reflected upon it later.
> 
> While HPB's says all her works contain mistakes I would not want to 
> be the one who decides what they are and corrects them on her 
> behalf, nor would I want to decide for others what is a service to 
> them by changes I might make to the SD. Even with the mistakes, my 
> many years of studying her works has left me feeling confident in 
> them as they are. That is not a feeling of confidence I would be 
> willing to place in Boris de Zirkoff, though I admire the work he 
> has done collating the material for the Collected Writings.
> ===============================================================
> 
> Here are Dallas' words:
> 
> ===========================================================
> Those who insist on using the ORIGINAL WRITINGS from which to
> study and grow in understanding are, in my esteem, not being
> dogmatic, they are merely being careful.
> 
> For their understanding they can (in case of The SECRET
> DOCTRINE ) recall that the Mahatmas gave Dr. Hubbe-Schleiden a
> signed certificate ( reprinted by Mr. Judge in PATH Magazine,
> Vol. 8, p. 1-3 ) This certificate stated that The SECRET
> DOCTRINE was the produced under their triple authorship.
> 
> Personally, I have a great pity for those who have made
> alterations and invisible editing in such an important work. I
> include all who may have done this in my mind. On the opposite
> hand: I feel gratitude for those who have offered "corrections
> needed in the ORIGINAL" and that they think will be helpful to
> students, but who have been careful to IDENTIFY and FOOTNOTE
> their changes so that the said student has a choice.
> 
> By what amounts to "concealing" those changes made in the
> ORIGINAL (yet using the Original Title) and thus tacitly
> attributing those new and interposed changes to the Author - who
> has had no chance to agree to them -- they may have blurred or
> obscured some meanings. Just how important those altered
> meanings and changes are, need not be a subject for restudy if
> one deals with the ORIGINALS to begin with.
> ================================================
> 
> Bottom Line: BOTH Besant & de Zirkoff editions of SD have been 
> SILENT EDITED.....
> 
> 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=1,1153431725.445753.9558.aldavila.hst.terra.com.br,6823,Des15,Des15
> 
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 20/07/2006 / Versão: 4.4.00/4811
> Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/


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