Theos-Talk Archives (October 2008 Message tt00556)

Leadbeater vs Anand on the Mahatma Letters????
-----------------------------------------------

Anand has told Theos-Talk readers his views about the Mahatma Letters.

He heads one posting with this subject title:

"Why did Blavatsky materialize fake Mahatma Letters?"

Another posting he gives with this subject heading:

"Blavatsky's factory of fake Mahatma Letters"

Below are some of Anand's statements collated from his various 
postings:

---------------------------------------------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------
In reality authenticity of those [Mahatma] letters through Blavatsky 
is questionable?.Blavatsky was in even more advantageous position 
because she could materialize any letter, and bring content into it 
that could support her own views?. She could materialize any thought 
she wanted in Master's handwriting and sign it with Master's name.
----------------------------------------------------------
And to support Blavatsky's own opinions, she materialized Mahatma 
Letters carrying her own thoughts. ?.many of the Mahatma Letters were 
not having thoughts of the Masters, but were carrying thoughts of 
Blavatsky pretending to be thoughts of Masters.
----------------------------------------------------------
Madam Blavatsky was adept in materializing letters and including her 
thoughts in them.  Letters are received at different times and by 
different people. It is possible that even if the recipients were not 
close to Blavatsky, she could materialize them at different places. 
The point is, just as Blavatsky could materialize Mahatma Letters for 
A.P. Sinnett, she might have materialized Mahatma Letters for many 
other individuals also, even if she was not present at that place.
----------------------------------------------------------
I think, what happened in case of Blavatsky is she imperfectly 
received Masters thought. Then she put those thoughts in her own 
words, materialized those words on paper using occult powers, and 
sent them out as letters from Masters.
----------------------------------------------------------
Blavatsky many times could not understand Master's thought, sometimes 
partially understood, sometimes entirely misunderstood. And then she 
materialized those words of her on paper and sent out as Mahatma 
Letters.  As this was the procedure, I don't think those letters can 
be called as letters from the Mahatmas.
----------------------------------------------------------
A.P. Sinnett was also of the opinion that Blavatsky's own thoughts 
contaminated so called Mahatma Letters.
----------------------------------------------------------

Now below I quote what C.W. Leadbeater tells his readers in HOW 
THEOSOPHY CAME TO ME:

----------------------------------------------------------
I could give you many instances in which she [H.P. Blavatsky] was 
accused of deception, and I can tell you exactly what it was that 
really happened, and can assure you that there was NO FRAUD whatever 
in the matter. That much I do know for myself?.

He [Richard Hodgson of the Society for Psychical Research] decided 
against H. P. B. in regard to the letters which came from the 
Masters, saying that she had written them herself. I have myself 
received such letters when she was thousands of miles away. I have 
seen them come in her presence, and I have seen them come when she 
was far away, and I know by irrefutable evidence that she did NOT 
write those letters. I tell you this because I think it is valuable 
for you to be able to say that you have seen or known of someone who 
is willing to bear personal testimony that there was NO FRAUD about 
such things. The testimony of one eye-witness outweighs the prejudice 
of many people who, not being present, hear these things only at 
third or thirteenth hand.
----------------------------------------------------------
Quoted from:  http://www.cwlworld.info/html/madame_blavatsky.htm
CAPS ADDED

Food for thought.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc

"...Contrast alone can enable us to appreciate things at
their right value; and unless a judge compares notes and
hears both sides he can hardly come to a correct decision."
H.P. Blavatsky