Theos-Talk Archives (January 2007 Message tt00211)

Dear Friends, 

Normally, it is necessary much more work to produce a paper-book than to publish something at the internet. A book is prepared with more care, or at least the same care as an an internet publication. 


Perhaps we must doubt the  reliability of Mr. Caldwell's presentation of theosophical texts at his website,   once we consider the testimony of Ernest Pelletier, an  experienced theosophist and author who belongs to the Edmonton Theosophical Society. 

Mr. Pelletier wrote on Cadlwell’s book “The Esoteric World of Madame Blavatsky” (Quest Books). 

After mentioning outwardly positive aspects of that volume,   Pelletier admits: 
 
“However, there are negative aspects to this book that need mention. There has been much silent editing done which renders the contents of this book impractical to quote from. While eliminating certain ‘irrelevant’ portions of the text may not necessarily affect context, it is important to know (and from what I understand, it is also a legal requirement – at least in Canada –  to indicate)  where changes have been made to the original text. Silent editing sets a precedent which eventually will erode the authenticity of the whole theosophical literature. Knowing this,  one wonders why this respected historian who has promoted and defended HPB would be compelled to compromise the integrity and accuracy of historical theosophical records.”  (1) 
 
 
“Impractical to quote from”, these texts,  as edited by Daniel Caldwell,  “compromise the accuracy and integrity of historical records”. A most serious warning to students, coming from an insightful theosophist and author.   
 
 
In fact,  there is a  rather generalized perception among long-standing Blavatsky students of various groups that one should not rely on Daniel Cadlwell’s  editions (in the internet or in paper).  Or in his actions.  

Who is David Green or Daniel Caldwell?  What do they stand for?  What do they want after all?  They do not support any theosophical association, but do criticize and sow dissent among most of them, and try to reduce Theosophy to personalistic issues.   

Gradually, the game Caldwell and his alternative personalities are playing starts to get easier to understand. 

Best regards,     Carlos. 
 
 
NOTE:

(1) FOHAT magazine, Edmonton, Canada, volume V, Summer 2001 edition, pp. 40-41.  


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