Was H.P. Blavatsky infallible?
Jun 13, 2011 09:18 AM
Below is a letter I wrote to a correspondent in June, 2010:
Are you confusing HPB and the Mahatmas with the Christian god and the claims made by the Christians about their Bible? :)
Also see the end of my email BELOW for 3 quotes from HPB in THE SECRET DOCTRINE on "infallibility".
Also see comments of Master KH on this general subject in THE MAHATMA LETTERS.
My limited understanding is that HPB was quite learned in the occult/theosophical teachings as taught to her by her teachers.
But this does NOT mean that when she tried to illustrate those teachings, etc. by examples from history, etc. that she also had a perfect knowledge on everything she wrote.
Are we to suppose that everytime she quotes some relevant statement from an author (e.g. Ragon) that she clairvoyantly confirmed the details of all the info in such a quote?
Jesus, how many years would this have taken HPB to do, EVEN if she had such perfect clairvoyant ability?
I doubt that the Mahatmas would have been able to do this!! Again see the relevant quotes in the Mahatma Letters.
I am always amazed at HPB's grasp of many many subjects but that does not mean that she was a walking encyclopedia of perfectly accurate info on each and every subject and detail in ALL her books and 1000 articles.
But my studies have led me to beleive that she had a remarkable knowledge of the occult teachings of her Masters....but even here she never claimed to know EVERYTHING about the occult/esoteric doctrine.
There are several quotes relevant even to this in the SD.
In summary, we must be careful not to make assumptions that are not even in evidence in HPB's and the Mahatmas' own words and claims.
And yes I have in years past also made such silly assumptions too!!
The SD quotes are BELOW.
Therefore the writer of the present statement must be prepared beforehand to meet with great opposition and even the denial of such statements as are brought forward in this work. Not that any claim to infallibility, or to perfect correctness in every detail of all that which is herein said, was ever put forward. Facts are there, and they can hardly be denied. But, owing to the intrinsic difficulties of the subjects treated, and the almost insurmountable limitations of the English tongue (as of all other European languages) to express certain ideas, it is more than probable that the writer has failed to present the explanations in the best and in the clearest form; yet all that could be done was done under every adverse circumstance, and this is the utmost that can be expected of any writer.
All the words and sentences placed in brackets in the Stanzas and Commentaries are the writer's. In some places they may be incomplete and even inadequate from the Hindu standpoint; but in the meaning attached to them in Trans-Himalayan Esotericism they are correct. In every case the writer takes any blame upon herself. Having never claimed personal infallibility, that which is given on her own authority may leave much to be desired, in the very abstruse cases where too deep metaphysic is involved. The teaching is offered as it is understood; and as there are seven keys of interpretation to every symbol and allegory, that which may not fit a meaning, say from the psychological or astronomical aspect, will be found quite correct from the physical or metaphysical.
And here, we must be allowed a last remark. No true theosophist, from the most ignorant up to the most learned, ought to claim infallibility for anything he may say or write upon occult matters. The chief point is to admit that, in many a way, in the classification of either cosmic or human principles, in addition to mistakes in the order of evolution, and especially on metaphysical questions, those of us who pretend to teach others more ignorant than ourselves ? are all liable to err. Thus mistakes have been made in "Isis Unveiled," in "Esoteric Buddhism," in "Man," in "Magic: White and Black," etc., etc.; and more than one mistake is likely to be found in the present work. This cannot be helped. For a large or even a small work on such abstruse subjects to be entirely exempt from error and blunder, it would have to be written from its first to its last page by a great adept, if not by an Avatar. Then only should we say, "This is verily a work without sin or blemish in it!" But, so long as the artist is imperfect, how can his work be perfect? "Endless is the search for truth!" Let us love it and aspire to it for its own sake, and not for the glory or benefit a minute portion of its revelation may confer on us. For who of us can presume to have the whole truth at his fingers' ends, even upon one minor teaching of Occultism?
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application