Theos-Talk Archives (November 2008 Message tt00004)

When spiritual/religious teaching is given, accuracy of statements,
Adepts don't consider accuracy always necessary. If you study
religions, you will find that in every religion there are some
statements which are improbable. 
 Even if Masters allowed Blavatsky and A.P. Sinnett to publish
inaccurate information, it was understood that nothing better could be
given to the world at that time. I don't think we can blame Masters
for allowing Blavatsky and Sinnett to publish inaccurate information.
 I think Masters knew that more accurate and better philosophy will be
given later through Mr. Leadbeater and Mrs. Annie Besant.
Best
Anand Gholap


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell"
<danielhcaldwell@...> wrote:
>
> In the article by H.P. Blavatsky that I quoted several weeks ago,
> she writes:
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> We have been asked by a correspondent why he should not "be free to
> suspect some of the so-called 'precipitated' [Mahatma] letters [from
> Koot Hoomi and Morya] as being forgeries," giving as his reason for
> it that while some of them bear the stamp of (to him) undeniable
> genuineness, others seem from their contents and style, to be
> imitations.
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I invite the reader to consider one paragraph of HPB's reply to the 
> above. She writes:
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> But there is another, and a far worse condition implied. For all that
> the recipient of "occult" letters can possibly know, and on the
> simple grounds of probability and COMMON HONESTY, the unseen
> correspondent [that is, Master Koot Hoomi] who would tolerate one
> single fraudulent line in his name, would wink at an unlimited
> repetition of the deception....
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> caps added.
> 
> Quoted from:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/46379
> 
> Now let us consider this quote in the present context of what Anand
> has been saying about the Mahatma letters.
> 
> On the one hand, Anand tells us that he is indeed a believer in the
> existence of the Master Koot Hoomi. And yet Anand apparently is
> willing to believe that H.P. Blavatsky, the messenger of Master Koot
> Hoomi to the public, actually faked letters from Master Koot Hoomi
> and apparently this "faking" occurred over a period of years.
> 
> But if the Master KH is really an adept or Master, then would he not
> have been aware that Madame Blavatsky was palming off fake letters
> using his name???
> 
> And would not the Master KH know that Mr. Sinnett is being deceived
> by these fake letters and would not the Master know that Sinnett is
> even publishing some of these fake letters in ESOTERIC BUDDHISM
> (1883)???
> 
> Surely the Master KH would be aware that these "faked" letters being
> published in ESOTERIC BUDDHISM would deceive and mislead hundreds if
> not thousands of readers.
> 
> What kind of "Master" would allow such things to occur???
> 
> What kind of ethics, morality and even "common honesty" does the
> Master Koot Hoomi have if such are the "facts" as suggested by
> Anand?????
> 
> And consider one more point.
> 
> In 1884 with all this supposed faking and deceiving being done by
> HPB, does Anand really believe that the Master KH would still use
> H.P. Blavatsky to send genuine letters to C.W. Leadbeater?
> 
> If HPB had already been deceiving A.P. Sinnett over several years in
> to believing that certain letters were from the Master when actually
> they were not, why should we believe that in 1884 the real KH sent
> the following letter through HPB to C.W. Leadbeater???
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Since your intuition led you in the right direction and made you
> understand that it was my desire you should go to Adyar immediately -
> I may say more. The sooner you go the better. Do not lose one day
> more than you can help. Sail on the 5th if possible. Join Upasika at
> Alexandria. Let no one know you are going and may the blessing of our
> Lord, and my poor blessing shield you from every evil in your new
> life. Greeting to you my new chela.
> 
> K. H.
> 
> Show my notes to no one.
> --------------------------------------------------------
> 
> If HPB could deceive Sinnett with fake Mahatma letters, why would she
> not ALSO deceive Mr. Leadbeater?????
> 
> So Anand, what about Master Koot Hoomi's ethics?
> 
> And even if one assumes HPB was not faking letters, but was from time 
> to time misunderstanding the Master's thoughts and then these 
> misleading thoughts, ideas and even teachings wound up either in 
> Sinnett's books or Blavatsky's books, why did the Master Koot Hoomi 
> not correct Blavatsky?
> 
> Think about it.
> 
> Here we find these Masters wanting to convey their teachings to the 
> public and they pick such an incompetent and ill-trained person or 
> chela that constantly --- over the course of years and years -- this 
> chela misunderstands them and their teachings and writes many books 
> and hundreds of articles conveying misunderstandings of the teachings 
> and yet the Masters KH and M just ignore the whole thing, never 
> saying to HPB:  "HPB you have misstated the teaching, write an 
> article or new book setting the record straight."
> 
> Maybe the Masters were a bunch of incompetent bunglers either who 
> didn't know what was going on or knew but didn't care to do anything 
> about it....
> 
> Daniel
> http://hpb.cc
>