Theos-Talk Archives (October 2008 Message tt00353)

Anand, you write:

-------------------------------------------------------
As I understand, Mahatmas did not dictate every word of the letter to
disciples, even psychically they did not communicate words of his
letter. At the most, Masters conveyed certain ideas to chelas, these
chelas then put those ideas into their (chelas') own words. Disciples
writing of Master's thought depends on many factors. Disciple writes
what he interprets Master's thought, he writes what he receives.
Disciple may not understand Master's thought or he may partially
understand Master's thought, or he may entirely misunderstand Master's
thought. So when disciple writes Master's thought, we need to remember
that that thought is disciple's understanding of Master's thought and
so it may not be exactly Master's thought.
If this is so, such writing by chela can not be considered as letter
from the Master.
-------------------------------------------------------

You say this is your understanding.

I give below some words of H.P. Blavatsky herself so that readers can 
compare and contrast them with what you have written above:

-------------------------------------------------------
...it is hardly one out of a hundred "occult" letters that is ever
written by the [physical] hand of the Master, in whose name and on 
whose behalf they are sent, as the Masters have neither need nor 
leisure to write them; and that when a Master says, "I wrote that 
letter," it means only that every word in it was dictated by him and 
impressed under his direct supervision.

Generally they make their chela, whether near or far away, 
[physically] write (or precipitate) them, by impressing upon his mind 
the ideas they wish expressed, and if necessary aiding him in the 
picture-printing process of precipitation. It depends entirely upon 
the chela's state of development, how accurately the ideas may be 
transmitted and the writing-model imitated.
---------------------------------------------------------

And in those Mahatma Letters, we find the following extracts on the 
writing of the letters themselves:

------------------------------------------------------
Very often our very letters -- unless something very important and 
secret -- are written in our handwritings by our chelas. Thus, last 
year, some of my letters to you were precipitated, and when sweet and 
easy precipitation was stopped -- well I had but to compose my mind, 
assume an easy position, and -- think, and my faithful "Disinherited" 
had but to copy my thoughts, making only occasionally a blunder.
------------------------------------------------------
The letter in question was framed by me while on a journey and on 
horse-back. It was dictated mentally, in the direction of, 
and "precipitated" by, a young chela not yet expert at this branch of 
Psychic chemistry....
------------------------------------------------------
I transcribe them with my own hand this once, whereas the letter in 
your possession was written by the chela. I ask you also to compare 
this hand-writing with that of some of the earlier letters you 
received from me. Bear in mind, also the "O.L.'s" emphatic denial at 
Simla that my first letter had ever been [physically] written by 
myself. I felt annoyed at her gossip and remarks then; it may serve a 
good purpose now. 
------------------------------------------------------
In noticing M's opinion of yourself expressed in some of his letters -
- (you must not feel altogether so sure that because they are in his 
handwriting, they are written by him, though of course every word is 
sanctioned by him to serve certain ends) . . . 
-------------------------------------------------------

Notice this KH statement:

"...my faithful 'Disinherited' had but to copy my thoughts, making 
ONLY OCCASIONALLY A BLUNDER...."

But Anand, are suggesting that so MANY BLUNDERS were actually made in 
transmitting the Mahatma Letters that nothing or very little can be 
relied upon as accurate and correct in these letters?  

Are you suggesting that we should just "throw away" the Mahatma 
Letters because they are unreliable and worthless?

And are you suggesting that none of the TEACHINGS found in the 
Mahatma Letters are accurate???  Or that most of the teachings found 
in the  Mahatma Letters are NOT accurately transmitted from the 
Masters?

But IF the Mahatma Letters are too unreliable, then WHERE, what 
SOURCES do we turn to find what the Masters REALLY TAUGHT?????

Daniel
http://hpb.cc