Theos-Talk Archives (October 2008 Message tt00770)

I give below several quotes collated from several of Anand's postings.

I ask the interested subscribers to read them again and then 
following those quotes consider a few other Mahatma letters and one 
particular account and testimony:

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

Mahatma Letters were precipitated. Blavatsky's being away from Bombay
or Adyar NEED NOT BLOCK HER CAPACITY to produce phenomena at places
where she was not.

?I think it was possible for HPB to create a form of the Master, show 
that form to people, and MAKING THEM FEEL that Master had visited 
them or met them. This I am giving you as one possibility behind 
seeing Master physically or astrally.

Just as Blavatsky could materialize letters, perhaps she could also
create a form of the Master, GIVING THE IMPRESSION to concerned
individuals that Master visited them and gave letter.

?I think, TRUE RESEARCHERS?will consider seriously before concluding 
that REAL Master visited those individuals and handed over letters.
-------------------------------------------------------------
caps added

Now I want to point out to the reader that in previous months and 
previous years on Theos-Talk, Anand has made other comments about 
certain Mahatma letters.

In one posting, Anand wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------------
Leadbeater's Master (K.H.) wrote in June 1886 to him " I am pleased
with you"
--------------------------------------------------------------

And in another posting Anand told readers:

--------------------------------------------------------------
Master K.H. wrote to Mr. Leadbeater "I am pleased with you" All three 
letters from Master K.H. to Mr. Leadbeter can be read at
http://www.anandgholap.net/KH_Letter_To_CWL.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------

First a little background.  The KH 1886 note is to be found on a 
letter written by HPB and sent from Europe to Mr. Leadbeater in 
Ceylon.

The KH quote is part of a brief annotation added to HPB's letter.

Why does Anand say in these two postings that "Leadbeater's Master 
(K.H.) wrote..."  and "Master K.H. wrote..."???

In light of what Anand writes in the quotes I've given at the 
beginning of this posting, isn't it possible that in fact HPB simply 
wrote the KH note?  The note wasn't written by KH, wasn't from KH.  
But instead --- as Anand contends in other instances ---- the note is 
simply "carrying thoughts of Blavatsky PRETENDING to be thoughts of 
Masters."

And in regards to the other 2 KH letters to C.W. Leadbeater which 
Anand refers to --- which were received in England, one of them 
materialized in the palm of HPB and the other one received thru the 
mail in England --- in light of what Anand is contending (see quotes 
above), isn't it also possible that these 2 letters aren't from a 
Master K.H.?  Certainly if we accept Anand's way of thinking then the 
3 letters are just "plain forgeries" (AN OFFENSE!!!) simply "carrying 
thoughts of Blavatsky PRETENDING to be thoughts of Masters."

Or as Anand also phrases it:  "In reality authenticity of those 
[Mahatma] letters through Blavatsky is QUESTIONABLE...."

And now consider C.W. Leadbeater's testimony as to encountering the 
Master K.H. and Djwal Kul at Adyar.  First Leadbeater's account:

--------------------------------------------------------------
...When Colonel Olcott left us [in 1885] on his tour Adyar 
[headquarters of the Theosophical Society near Madras, India] 
remained empty....

One day, however, when the Master Kuthumi honoured me with a visit, 
He asked me whether I had ever attempted a certain kind of meditation 
connected with the development of the mysterious power called 
kundalini....He recommended me to make a few efforts along certain 
lines.... 

Naturally I took the hint, and worked away steadily, and I think I 
may say intensely, at that particular kind of meditation day after 
day....

....It will be understood that I lived there in the octagonal room by 
the river-side alone for many long hours every day, and practically 
secure from any interruption except at the meal-times which I have 
mentioned. Several Masters were so gracious as to visit me during 
that period and to offer me various hints; but it was the Master 
Djwal Kul who gave most of the necessary instruction....
---------------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from "How Theosophy Came to Me by C.W. Leadbeater".

Now if readers will remember in the last week I've quoted probably 
more than a dozen accounts of OTHER individuals meeting the Masters:  
Olcott, Damodar, Brown, Pillai, Ramaswamier, and others.  And yet for 
reasons best known to Anand, he wrote the following:

-------------------------------------------------------------------
?I think it was possible for HPB to create a form of the Master, show 
that form to people, and MAKING THEM FEEL that Master had visited 
them or met them. This I am giving you as one possibility behind 
seeing Master physically or astrally.

Just as Blavatsky could materialize letters, perhaps she could also
create a form of the Master, GIVING THE IMPRESSION to concerned
individuals that Master visited them and gave letter.

?I think, TRUE RESEARCHERS?will consider seriously [this possibility] 
before concluding that REAL Master visited those individuals....
------------------------------------------------------------------

So if this is possible, why isn't it just as possible for Mr. 
Leadbeater meeting Masters at Adyar??????

HPB was simply up to her ways -- devious or not --- fooling Mr. 
Leadbeater, MAKING HIM FEEL that the Master KH had visited him. She 
simply created the form of the Master --- and gave Mr. Leadbeater THE 
IMPRESSION that the Master had visited him.

Remember that in the Lahore incident that I previouly cited the 
Master KH came three times on two consecutive nights to see Colonel 
Olcott and that testimony didn't stop Anand from bringing 
this "possibility" up and encouraging "true researchers" to consider 
this "possibility" of HPB creating the whole thing using her psychic 
powers.

So if the 1883 Lahore incident was "created" by HPB long distance, 
why not also Leadbeater's encounters at Adyar????

And consider one other point.

Anand's "possibility" actually does away with all evidence that the 
Masters actually existed.

And as I said in my posting to Anand which can be found at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/46744

-------------------------------------------------------
If HPB could indeed "create a form of the Master" and bamboozle
people into thinking a "real Master visited those individuals", then
have YOU considered an even MORE thought-provoking possibility?

Anand, isn't it also possible that there were NO Masters Koot Hoomi
and Morya and Djual Khool --- no masters at all? They just didn't
really exist!!!

H.P. Blavatsky --- being the devious character you have tried to
portray her as --- simply MADE UP, INVENTED the Mahatmas in the first
place. And she used this remarkable power to BAMBOOZLE all the
Theosophists --- Colonel Olcott, A.P. Sinnett, Countess Wachtmeister,
S. Ramaswamier, William Q Judge, C.W. Leadbeater, Annie Besant and a
few dozen other people --- into believing they had encountered these
Mahatmas when in fact they were simply experiencing thought-forms
created by Blavatsky herself.

...If anything, she was THE Mahatma!!!! She simply created the
other "Masters" to serve her scheme and plan --- whatever that might
have been!!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------

So I hope Anand as a responsible "true researcher" will deal with all 
of this as outlined above.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc