Theos-Talk Archives (November 2006 Message tt00068)

Carlos Aveline writes:

"...there is a rather generalized perception among long-standing
Blavatsky students t hat one should not rely on Daniel Cadlwell's 
editions (IN THE INTERNET or in paper) of theosophical texts." caps 
added.

Notice Carlos' phrase:  IN THE INTERNET 

I assume he wants readers to believe that all the primary source 
documents I have on the internet (WWW) at Blavatsky Archives are not 
reliable and are edited and abridged.

Please readers, see the following 2 lists of all the historical 
documents I have reproduced for the benefit of readers and students:

http://blavatskyarchives.com/compitems2.htm

http://blavatskyarchives.com/compitems3.htm

These hundreds of historical documents have been reproduced / 
transcribed from the original sources with no silent editing of the 
text, no abridgement. 
 
Of course, there may be a few typos from time to time in a few of the 
documents which I always correct as they are found.  I even have paid 
a proof-reader and still typos sometimes slip thru.

And in my book THE ESOTERIC PAPERS OF MADAME BLAVATSKY, I wanted to 
present the most accurate copies possible so when at all possible I 
gave photographic facsimiles of the original material.

http://esotericpapers.net/

And on my internet website I even tried sometimes to give 
photographic facsimiles of the documents, for example, HPB's ES 
Instruction NO. 1 (the 1890 edition).  See:

http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/ests1contents.htm

Of course, in some of my own compilations I have sometimes edited the 
text.  Such as in the following one:

A Casebook of Encounters with the Theosophical Mahatmas.
http://blavatskyarchives.com/mastersencounterswith.htm

But in this compilation I ALSO tell the reader:

"In this paper I have compiled most of these testimonies in 
chronological order.   The narratives have been transcribed from the 
original sources but material not relevant to the subject has been 
silently deleted. The original texts, however, can be found from the 
source references. Explanatory words added by the editor are enclosed 
within brackets."

I have not tried to hide anything from readers when reproducing 
material in my online archives.

But for reasons best known to Carlos Aveline, he wants to project a 
misleading impression.  Why?

Daniel
http://hpb.cc