Carlos on the 3rd Volume of THE SECRET DOCTRINE
Apr 29, 2006 11:13 AM
Carlos writes in part:
That may explain the DISAPPEARANCE of volumes III and IV. . . .
As to the UTTER LACK of legitimacy of the volume III as published by
Annie Besant 1898, is it amply demonstrated by Boris de Zirkoff in
his introduction to the Volume XIV of HPB's "Collected Writings"....
These were texts NOT ORIGINALLY DESTINED to belong to "The Secret
Doctrine". . . .
Unfortunately, the above statements of Carlos show an almost total
lack of understanding regarding Volume III.
I go over much of this in great detail in my essay to be found at:
In regards to Carlos' remarks about "Boris de Zirkoff in his
introduction to the Volume XIV of HPB's 'Collected Writings'",
although Mr. de Zirkoff's Introduction contains a great deal of
valuable material, unfortunately there are a good number of
misstatements and certain confusions in Boris' Introduction.
Unfortunately Mr. de Zirkoff's Historical Introduction to the Adyar
edition of the SD ALSO contains certain confusions concerning the
writing of the SD in 1886-1887 and about Volume III.
[Although all students of HPB's writings owe Mr. de Zirkoff a great
deal of gratitude for all of his hard work covering many decades on
the compiling, etc. of HPB's writings, the fact remains that there
are various statements by Mr. de Zirkoff on a variety of subjects
which contain mistakes and confusion. I refer the reader to two
examples of this that I have documented and placed on the web:
(1) Some Observations on the Claims made by Boris de Zirkoff and
others about Madame Blavatsky's THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARY
(2) Concerning his statements about the E.S. Instructions
I interject here that I am very mindful of the fact that we stand on
the shoulders of those whom we criticize, that is, their work helps
us maybe to see better and farther and without their intitial effort
we would possibly not have a better undertstanding, etc.]
A careful reading of my essay on Vol. III of the SD will help to
clarify some of this confusion but I see that I need to write a
second essay going over all of Mr. de Zirkoff's material and showing
chapter and line where the confusion is.
Concerning Carlos' statement which reads:
"These [that is, the material in Volume III excluding the E.S.
material???] were texts NOT ORIGINALLY DESTINED to belong to 'The
It can be documented thru the Wurzburg manauscript and other
material that much of the material in the published 1897 3rd volume
was in HPB's original 1886 manuscript of Volume I of the Secret
So contrary to what Carlos is stating, it can be shown that much of
the text of the 1897 3rd volume was definitely ORIGINALLY DESTINED
to belong to THE SECRET DOCTRINE.
The Wurzburg manuscript by itself clearly shows this is the case.
As time permits in the next year, I will try to enlarge and expand
my original essay to show even more of this.
Of course, I am not really surprised to find such statements by
Carlos since apparently he doesn't even know what the basic thesis
of my essay is about.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application