Theos-Talk Archives (October 2008 Message tt00980)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell"
<danielhcaldwell@...> wrote:
>
> Anand,
> 
> You write:
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> From references brought earlier, certain points become clear about how
> so called Mahatma Letters came into existence. I am listing them here
> so that further analysis will have base of those facts.
> According to Blavatsky
> 1) Most of the letters were not written by Masters' hands.
> 2) Letters were not dictated verbatim. That means every word of
> letters was not chosen by Masters.
> 3) Letters depended on chela's development and capacity to understand
> (Mahatma's thoughts).
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Now let us look at what Blavatsky actually wrote and what you even 
> say are "those facts":
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> ...it is hardly one out of a hundred "occult" letters that is ever 
> written by the 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, 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.
> -------------------------------------------------------------

> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ...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.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------

 If you assume that every word is dictated by Masters and chela
accurately wrote or precipitated them, then whatever may be chela's
understanding, it will  not alter contents of the letter, and letter
would be perfectly what Masters want to convey. But other statement of
Blavatsky contradicts this idea saying "It depends entirely upon the
chela's state of development, how accurately the ideas may be
transmitted and the writing-model imitated." 
Blavatsky's this statement is admission that Mahatma Letters are not
entirely reliable. And even if Masters composed every word, they could
not come accurately always in their letters, as precipitation depended
on chela.
"It depends entirely upon the chela's state of development, how
accurately the ideas may be transmitted and the writing-model imitated." 
Here we need to note that Blavatsky here tells that IDEAS are
transmitted. (she did not say words were transmitted) So there is
contradiction. At one place Blavatsky writes that every WORD was
dictated and at other places she says IDEAS were transmitted.
If Masters chose every word and if chela could reproduce them
accurately, then "the writing-model imitated" will not depend on
chela's development. But as it does depend on chela's development, it
is clear that chela could make mistakes in precipitating those letters. 
Also Blavatsky's writing shows that it was chela who precipitated
letters and Masters did not generally precipitate letters. From other
writings of occultism we know that many times it can happen that chela
would take his own thoughts as Master's thoughts, being  unable to
distinguish between his own thoughts and Master's thoughts. And so
what chela precipitates may be his own thoughts mistaken as thoughts
of the Masters. 

Best
Anand Gholap