Theos-Talk Archives (October 2008 Message tt00428)

Anand,

You write:

------------------------------------------------------
Mahatma Letters were not written verbatim. They are HPB's writing of
what she understand from Masters' thoughts.
But THERE IS REAL PROBLEM HERE. Blavatsky materialized her own words
in the handwriting of the Masters, signed them with Masters' names and
then told that they were Mahatma letters. In today's world this would
be called as PLAIN FORGERY.
It is like X writing something, imitating Y's handwriting, and signing
it as Y.
THIS IS ACTUALLY AN OFFENSE.
-------------------------------------------------------
caps added.

So IF this is really true as you have described it above, then aren't 
the Masters Koot Hoomi and Morya JUST AS GUILTY as HPB of this 
OFFENSE, THIS FORGERY?

Anand, surely Master Koot Hoomi KNEW that he was in actual 
correspondence with Mr. Sinnett.  Do you agree Anand?

And surely Master Koot Hoomi KNEW that he dictated to some chela his 
letters and surely he also knew that the chela would then transcribe 
the letter and it would be sent to Mr. Sinnett whether in an ordinary 
way or whether in an occult way.

And yet you say:  THERE IS REAL PROBLEM HERE.  PLAIN FORGERY.  THIS 
IS ACTUALLY AN OFFENSE.

Unless I am missing something here, Koot Hoomi is actually INVOLVED 
in this FORGERY just as much as you allege HPB is.  

Surely Koot Hoomi knew that he wasn't physically writing most of his 
letters.  And surely Koot Hoomi knew therefore that some chela 
whether HPB or some other chela was then writing the letter down on 
paper.  Right?

And surely Koot Hoomi would know about his own letters as they were 
published in Sinnett's 1881 book THE OCCULT WORLD and Sinnett's 1883 
ESOTERIC BUDDHISM.

In some of the later Mahatma letters, KH even makes references to 
what he had previously given in letters published in Sinnett's 2 
books.

And since Masters KH and M trained HPB and her faculties in the 
various occult methods by which the letters were  transmitted, etc., 
then are not the Masters guilty of training her in the very methods 
and procedures that she used and which you call an OFFENSE, a 
PROBLEM, a FORGERY???

Even in the Mahatma Letters, we find all of this SO CALLED FORGERY 
described to Mr. Sinnett himself:

------------------------------------------------------
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) . . .
-------------------------------------------------------

Anand, please please notice these words to Sinnett:

--------------------------------------------------------------
Bear in mind, also the "O.L.'s" [Blavatsky] 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.
--------------------------------------------------------------

So from this we see that FROM THE VERY BEGINNNG Madame Blavatsky was 
upfront and didn't hide the fact from Sinnett that the letters were 
usually not physically written by Koot Hoomi!!!!!!!
 
And again Anand, reread this part of another letter:

------------------------------------------------------------
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------

Here is a very good description given to Mr. Sinnett about how many 
of the letters were composed and written.

Unless you want to contend that this statement did not come from Koot 
Hoomi at all, then this excerpt shows that Koot Hoomi himself knew 
about the process and actually used the process himself - the process 
and methods which you now claim was a PROBLEM, an OFFENSE, a FORGERY!!

And rereading your own words quoted at the beginning of this posting, 
you apparently believe that HPB wrote all the Mahatma letters.  But 
if you look at the actual evidence a number of chelas including 
Damodar and Djual Khool acted as transmitters.  Much could be said 
about this.

So your assumption that HPB "wrote" all the letters just doesn't fit 
the facts.

There are even Mahatma letters which were written TO HPB herself.  

I have discovered within the last few years such a letter which is 
still unpublished and which has HPB's question in her own handwriting 
and in the same letter an answer in the KH script.

Did she "write" both her question to the Master and then KH's 
answer???

I can give examples of Mahatma letters being received at certain 
locations when HPB herself was hundreds if not thousands of miles 
away.  C. Jinarajadasa mentions some of them.

Now you may say that HPB was CAPABLE of transmitting a letter to a 
certain location when she was hundreds if not thousands of miles away.

Surely that shows a remarkable ability if indeed she could do that.  
And yet with such talent and ability, you contend that she couldn't 
transcribe the Master's thoughts correctly!!

Food for thought.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc