From dalval14@earthlink.net Sat Jul 01 12:38:48 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 67020 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2006 19:35:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m40.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2006 19:35:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net) (209.86.89.70) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2006 19:35:36 -0000 Received: from [216.175.106.19] (helo=DALLAS) by elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1FwlF9-0006bX-OV; Sat, 01 Jul 2006 15:35:04 -0400 To: Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2006 12:34:45 -0700 Message-ID: <00d701c69d45$6f01a1c0$0a0110ac@DALLAS> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 1 (Highest) X-MSMail-Priority: High X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Importance: High In-Reply-To: X-ELNK-Trace: c552449649a8b16d1aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec797ff452a46185c69eac93c99f8ef04ff5350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.89.70 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 From: "W.Dallas TenBroeck" Reply-To: Subject: Re: Origin of Evil X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573; y=ooZ-OOfjZJpze-__Zs3N6IK-i7sDFu6qWjYeCxrZYF4A4g X-Yahoo-Profile: dalval2 X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 34264 Saturday, July 01, 2006 Dear Friends: Lets consider what THEOSOPHY has said on this subject: SOURCE OF EVIL=20=20 NEVER DOES THE INEFFABLE STAND UNVEILED BEFORE MORTAL MAN Q (2) I met an F.T.S. the other day who believes he has arrived at "Saintship" and cannot therefore err. He cannot bear the slightest contradiction , believing that he has arrived at such a state of "enlightenment" that he is infallible, whereas we less gifted mortals feel that he often makes grave mistakes. Of course this assumption is untenable in this case, but are sainthood and consequent infallibility likely to result from the humdrum every-day life of an ordinary nineteenth century man? Answer - For the Deity there is no fall. He can not fall.=20 In the so-called descent into matter, He must manifest through something. Never does the Ineffable stand unveiled before mortal man.=20 When the All Wise deemed it good to manifest Himself as individualities, He did so through the soul. [MANAS -- DUALITY of Higher and Lower Mind depending on how we aim its power] After creating the human man with the soul that all things possess, "He breathed into his nostrils and man became a living soul," or the Deity manifested Himself through the soul in the man.=20 Nothing below man is immortal.=20 Man is not immortal; his soul is not immortal; but the breath of God, which is God's life or God himself, is forever.=20 Man was to have lived as the angels, "for they also were made"; but, although by the grosser elements of matter or nature, by its lusts and desires, its seductive beauties and deceptive pleasures, realized most full= y through the senses of the human body, the soul was drawn down instead of upward, into ignorance of the true instead of toward the wisdom of God, holding and binding thus the spirit in the meshes of the grossest part of nature, and so fell.=20 EVIL -- SOURCE OF God did not fall, - the spirit; nor did man as the human man; but the soul, being a free agent, did so, causing the spirit to be limited, and entailing pain and anguish upon the human man.=20 Man with the Divine manifest in him was to know only the good, or wisdom; but, not content, he must eat of the tree of the KNOWLEDGE of good and evil= , or the misapplication of the good, and fell into ignorance.=20 There can be no greater evil than losing the wisdom of a God for the ignorance of a man. Herein consists the only evil of the fall after the descent into matter.=09 W Q J ART II P. 451 THE ORIGIN OF EVIL by H. P. Blavatsky [H P B Articles I 124, extracts] =09 P. 124 The problem of the origin of evil can be philosophically approached=85 [by] ancient wisdom=85 It attributes the birth of Kosmos and = the evolution of life to the breaking asunder of primordial, manifested UNITY, into plurality, or the great illusion of form. HOMOGENEITY having transformed itself into Heterogeneity, contrasts have naturally been created; hence sprang what we call EVIL [P. 134 =85the Indian formula, which is a Secret Doctrine teaching.] [ P. 130 This explanation of the problem and origin of evil being=85of an entirely metaphysical character, h= as nothing to do with physical laws=85]=20 P. 125 The Eastern pantheist, whose philosophy teaches him to discriminate between Being or ESSE =85He knows he can put an end to form alone, not to being--and that only on this plane of terrestrial illusion.=20 P. 125 =85by killing out in himself Tanha (the unsatisfied desire for existence, or the "will to live")--he will thus gradually escape the curse of rebirth and conditioned existence.=20 P. 125 =85believing but in One Reality, which is eternal Be-ness, the "causeless CAUSE" from which he has exiled himself into a world of forms, h= e regards the temporary and progressing manifestations of it in the state of Maya (change or illusion), as the greatest evil=85but=85as a process in nat= ure, as unavoidable=85 It is the only means by which he can pass from limited an= d conditioned lives of sorrow into eternal life, or into that absolute "Be-ness," which is so graphically expressed in the Sanskrit word SAT.=20 P. 125 The idea that matter and its Protean manifestations are the source and origin of universal evil and sorrow is a very old one,=20 P. 125 Gautama Buddha =85the Sage and Philosopher, who sacrificed himsel= f for Humanity by living for it, in order to save it, [in living, not in running away from life] by teaching men to see in the sensuous existence o= f matter misery alone=85his efforts were to release mankind from too strong a= n attachment to life, which is the chief cause of Selfishness--hence the creator of mutual pain and suffering.=20 P. 126 His doctrine shows evil immanent, not in matter, which is eternal, but in the illusions created by it: through the changes and transformations of matter generating life--because these changes are conditioned and such life is ephemeral. [ WHY ?] P. 126 =85if we would discern good from evil, light from darkness, and appreciate the former, we can do so only through the contrasts between the two. P. 126 Buddha's philosophy points [to]=85its esotericism, the hidden sou= l of it, draws the veil aside and reveals to the Arhat all the glories of LIF= E ETERNAL in all the Homogeneousness of Consciousness and Being=85a fact to t= he Sage and esoteric Pantheist.=20 P. 126 =85the root idea that evil is born and generated by the ever increasing complications of the homogeneous material, which enters into for= m and differentiates more and more as that form becomes physically more perfect, has an esoteric side to it =85 P. 126 Its dead-letter aspect, however, became the subject of speculation with every ancient thinking nation=85in India the primitive thought=85has been disfigured by Sectarianism, and has led to the ritualist= ic, purely dogmatic observances of the Hatha Yogis, in contradistinction to the philosophical Vedantic Raja Yoga.=20 P. 127 It thus follows that the deeply religious Pantheism of the Hindu and Buddhist philosopher=85[lead him to consider that]=85pain as well as so= rrow are illusions, due to attachment to this life, and ignorance. Therefore he strives after eternal, changeless life, and absolute consciousness in the state of Nirvana P. 127 For the [Hindu]=85 philosopher there is but one real life, Nirvan= ic bliss, which is a state differing in kind, not in degree only, from that of any of the planes of consciousness in the manifested universe. [He]=85in hi= s spiritual aspirations [ignores]=85even the integral homogeneous unit=85He k= nows of, and believes in only the direct cause of that unit, eternal and ever living, because the ONE uncreated, or rather not evoluted.=20 P. 127 Hence all his efforts are directed toward the speediest reunion possible with, and return to his pre-primordial condition, after his pilgrimage through this illusive series of visionary lives, with their unreal phantasmagoria of sensuous perceptions.=20 P. 128 =85the Eastern Pantheist=85submits to the inevitable, and tries to b= lot out from his path in life as many "descents into rebirth" as he can, by avoiding the creation of new Karmic causes. [JAINS] The Buddhist philosophe= r knows that the duration of the series of lives of every human being--unless he reaches Nirvana "artificially" ("takes the kingdom of God by violence ")=85is given, allegorically in the forty-nine days passed by Gautama the Buddha under the Bo-tree=85And the Hindu sage is aware, in his turn, that h= e has to light the first, and extinguish the forty-ninth fire before he reaches his final deliverance. Knowing this, both sage and philosopher wait patiently for the natural hour of deliverance. . P. 128 Fn This is an esoteric tenet=85the Theosophist=85may compute the 7 by 7 of the forty-nine "days" and the forty-nine "fires," and understand that the allegory refers esoterically to the seven human consecutive root-races with their seven subdivisions. Every monad is born in the first and obtains deliverance in the last seventh race. Only a "Buddha" is shown reaching it during the course of one life.=20 P. 128 The seeds of evil and sorrow were indeed the earliest result and consequence of the heterogeneity of the manifested universe. Still they are but an illusion produced by the law of contrasts, which, as described, is a fundamental law in nature. Neither good nor evil would exist were it not fo= r the light they mutually throw on each other.=20 P. 129 Being, under whatever form, having been observed from the World's creation to offer these contrasts, and evil predominating in the universe owing to Ego-ship or selfishness, the rich Oriental metaphor has pointed to existence as expiating the mistake of nature; and the human soul (psuche), was henceforth regarded as the scapegoat and victim of unconscious OVER-SOUL.=20 P. 129 Ignorance alone is the willing martyr, but knowledge is the master, of natural Pessimism.=20 P. 129 If, instead of that, man proceeding on his life-journey looked=85but within himself and centered his point of observation on the in= ner man, he would soon escape from the coils of the great serpent of illusion. >From the cradle to the grave, his life would then become supportable and worth living, even in its worst phases.=20 P. 129 Pessimism--that chronic suspicion of lurking evil everywhere=85is= a boon to the spiritual, inasmuch as it makes the latter turn into the right path, and brings him to the discovery of another as fundamental a truth; namely, that all in this world is only preparatory because transitory.=20 P. 129 It is like a chink=85through which breaks in a ray of light from the eternal=85illuminating the inner senses, whispers to the prisoner=85of = the origin and the dual mystery of our being=85it is a=85proof of the presence = in man of THAT which knows, -- that there is another and a better life, once that the curse of earth-lives is lived through.=20 P. 130 Eastern wisdom teaches that spirit has to pass through the ordeal of incarnation and life, and be baptised with matter before it can reach experience and knowledge. After which only it receives the [second] baptism of soul, or self-consciousness, and may return to its original condition of a god, plus experience, ending with omniscience.=20 P 130 In other words, it can return to the original state of the homogeneity of primordial essence only through the addition of the fruitage of Karma, which alone is able to create an absolute conscious deity, remove= d but one degree from the absolute ALL.=20 P. 130 =85evil must have existed before Adam and Eve, who, therefore, are innocent of the slander of the original sin. For, had there been no evil or sin before them, there could exist neither tempting Serpent nor a Tree of Knowledge of good and evil in Eden.=20 P. 130 Too much knowledge about things of matter is thus rightly shown an evil.=20 P. 134 =85we read in the "Scientific Letters" by an anonymous Russian autho= r and critic:=20 =93In the evolution of isolated individuals, in the evolution of the organi= c world, in that of the Universe, as in the growth and development of our planet--in short wherever any of the processes of progressive complexity take place, there we find, apart from the transition from unity to plurality, and homogeneity to heterogeneity, a converse transformation--the transition front plurality to unity, from the heterogeneous to the homogeneous. . . . =93 P. 134 In this case material nature repeats the law that acts in the evolution of the psychic and the spiritual: both descend but to reascend an= d merge at the starting-point. The homogeneous formative mass or element differentiated in its parts, is gradually transformed into the heterogeneous; then, merging those parts into a harmonious whole, it recommences a converse process, or reinvolution, and returns as gradually into its primitive or primordial state.=20 P. 135-6 Modern Society is permeated with an increasing cynicism and honeycombed with disgust of life. This is the result of an utter ignorance of the operations of Karma and the nature of Soul evolution...Once the basi= s of the Great Law is grasped--and what philosophy can furnish better means for such a grasp and final solution, than the esoteric doctrine of the grea= t Indian Sages--=20 P.136 The reasonableness of Conscious Existence can be proved only by the study of the primeval--now esoteric--philosophy. And it says "there is neither death nor life, for both are illusions; being (or BENESS) is the only reality." =85 "Life is Death," said Claude Bernard. The organism lives because its parts are ever dying. The Survival Of The Fittest is surely based on this truism. The life of the superior whole requires the death of the inferior, the death of the parts depending on and being subservient to it. And, as life is death, so death is life, and the whole great cycle of lives form but ONE EXISTENCE--the worst day of which is on our planet. He who KNOWS will make the best of it. For there is a dawn for every being, when once freed from illusion and ignorance by Knowledge; and he will at last proclaim in truth and all Consciousness to Mahamaya:=20 BROKEN THY HOUSE IS, AND THE RIDGE-POLE SPLIT! DELUSION FASHIONED IT! SAFE PASS I THENCE--DELIVERANCE TO OBTAIN. . . . [from the DHAMMAPADA Gautama Buddha] =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Dallas -----Original Message----- From: khalil53 [mailto:khalil53@comcast.net]=20 Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 12:57 AM To: study@blavatsky.net Subject: [bn-study] Re: Origin of Evil Dear Robert, Thank you for your enlightened comments. We cannot force anyone to do anything, Nor can we ourselves hate them for their actions. =A0 sincerely, =A0 George Haynes ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Roberto N. Lupercio=20 To: study@blavatsky.net=20 Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 5:05 PM Subject: [bn-study] Origin of Evil Dear Pepe, This is only an idea. =A0 "We can't make them" RENOUNCE VIOLENCE. =A0 Every person has to do this renounce voluntarily. We can only spread the ideas of brotherhood. If we enforce any ideas it will became another religion or dogma. =A0 This quote may help: =A0 6. Those who desire to acquire the knowledge leading to the Siddhis (occult powers) have to renounce all the vanities of life and of the world . =20=20=20 [Lucifer, Vol. II, No. 8, April, 1888, pp. 150-154] PRACTICAL OCCULTISM Best regards =A0 Roberto L. -----Original Message-----=20 From: PepeGuitar@aol.com=20 Sent: Jun 27, 2006 9:54 PM=20 To: study@blavatsky.net=20 Subject: [bn-study] RE: Origin of Evil=20 We must do something. We humans. I propose to start a movement,=A0a campaign, to RENOUNCE VIOLENCE. Start individualy, then go to every group, every community, every religion, every country, and make them also RENOUNCE VIOLENCE. If we can achieve just this (and I know is a dream) we will have won. =A0 ------------------------------------------
Visit Seekerbooks.com and get great deals on books, music and videos. Seekerbooks.com is the bookstore for Blavatsky Net, your purchases help promote and sustain this site. Distributed by Blavatsky Net P.O. Box 847 Blue Ridge, GA 30513 You are currently subscribed to bn-study as: [rflupercio@earthlink.net] To unsubscribe, forward this message to %%email.unsub%%=20 ------------------------------------------ Visit Seekerbooks.com and get great deals on books, music and videos. Seekerbooks.com is the bookstore for Blavatsky Net, your purchases help promote and sustain this site. Distributed by Blavatsky Net P.O. Box 847 Blue Ridge, GA 30513 You are currently subscribed to bn-study as: [khalil53@comcast.net] To unsubscribe, forward this message to %%email.unsub%% ------------------------------------------
Visit Seekerbooks.com and get great deals on books, music and videos. Seekerbooks.com is the bookstore for Blavatsky Net, your purchases help promote and sustain this site. Distributed by Blavatsky Net P.O. Box 847 Blue Ridge, GA 30513 You are currently subscribed to bn-study as: [dalval14@earthlink.net] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-bn-study-7560482L@lists.lyris.net=20 From auspirograph@yahoo.com Sun Jul 02 06:25:39 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: auspirograph@yahoo.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 92177 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2006 13:03:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.67.33) by m24.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jul 2006 13:03:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n7a.bullet.sc5.yahoo.com) (66.163.187.150) by mta7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jul 2006 13:03:36 -0000 Received: from [66.163.187.123] by n7.bullet.sc5.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jul 2006 13:03:14 -0000 Received: from [66.218.69.4] by t4.bullet.sc5.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jul 2006 13:03:14 -0000 Received: from [66.218.66.77] by t4.bullet.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jul 2006 13:03:14 -0000 Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2006 13:03:14 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Message-ID: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-compose X-Originating-IP: 66.163.187.150 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:6:0:0 X-Yahoo-Post-IP: 144.138.3.230 From: "Spiro" Subject: Lucifer Question X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=123058641; y=hitqHsvulkV9mgAGax3MRCTZuJL9VRICRiyBR7LFmsUP5TKwipTg X-Yahoo-Profile: auspirograph X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 34265 Hi all, Hope all is well for you. I'd like to ask a question regarding some entries in the index of Lucifer 1887/1888 that I don't quite inderstand. These are: *Lucifer v1 September 1887 p8 Comments on Light on the Path by the author (1) (triangle symbol ttt) *Lucifer v1 October 1887 p90 Comments on Light on the Path by the author (2) (triangle symbol ttt) *Lucifer v1 October 1887 p134 Thoughts on Theosophy =96 (ttt) *Lucifer v1 January 1888 p379 The Seclusion of the Adept: Comments on Light on the Path (triangle symbol ttt) It's obvious the author of the comments is Mabel Collins but what does "(triangle symbol ttt)" refer to? I would be grateful for any assistance. Spiro From christinaleestemaker@yahoo.com Sun Jul 02 10:21:50 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: christinaleestemaker@yahoo.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 84791 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2006 17:17:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.67.35) by m33.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jul 2006 17:17:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n22a.bullet.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.51) by mta9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jul 2006 17:17:05 -0000 Received: from [66.218.66.59] by n22.bullet.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jul 2006 17:16:55 -0000 Received: from [66.218.66.84] by t8.bullet.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jul 2006 17:16:55 -0000 Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2006 17:16:55 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <005201c69c6d$6b29aee0$d59f1dd1@fn> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-compose X-Originating-IP: 66.94.237.51 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:6:0:0 X-Yahoo-Post-IP: 83.85.218.166 From: "christinaleestemaker" Subject: Re: Theos-World Ancient Secret Docrines found in caves? X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=162317756; y=okx9ag0FUE5N_OQi7UdXSmqgkWe3XQYhT_XcE5eBA29npK5zOOY3c7MQBGfA3d4 X-Yahoo-Profile: christinaleestemaker X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 34266 Hi Mauri. I did not know von Dainiken found some of it. Idiot they shot one or more persons for that. There are people knowing, whitout being there at all. Perhaps they want to make a lot of money in publishing part by part. Always going like that. And they don't tell anything new. We know there have been braintransplantations in the south of America=20 in Peru and a lot more. Year ago Robert Charroux(paleontelogue) wrote about all what have=20 happened in ages before. Greetings Christina. -- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Mauri" wrote: > > For more info: www.goldlibrary.com, www.philipcoppens.com,=20 www.nexusmagazine.com >=20 > FR wrote:<=20 > On a second journey he was accompanied by the known tv journalist=20 Karl Brugger. They where driving in a jeep in attempt to enter one of=20 the secret entries to the underground cities at a mountain. Suddenly=20 some men came and asked Mr Brugger whether he is Karl Brugger. As he=20 affirmed he was shot. Von Daniken was told that this was but a=20 warning, he will be short, too, when he ever mentions his findings=20 anymore. > This then he never spoke or wrote a word about it. >=20 > According to Alec Maclellan "The Lost World of Agarthi" HPB was in=20 possession of a map of the underground cities. Plato was allegedly=20 also writing about it. > Frank >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20=20 >=20 > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > From silva_cass@yahoo.com Sun Jul 02 21:02:25 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: silva_cass@yahoo.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 83491 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2006 03:46:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.67.36) by m26.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Jul 2006 03:46:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO web52107.mail.yahoo.com) (206.190.48.110) by mta10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Jul 2006 03:46:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 80848 invoked by uid 60001); 3 Jul 2006 03:45:56 -0000 Message-ID: <20060703034556.80846.qmail@web52107.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [211.28.165.96] by web52107.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 02 Jul 2006 20:45:56 PDT Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2006 20:45:56 -0700 (PDT) To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: 206.190.48.110 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 From: Cass Silva Subject: ABC MODEL - ATTENTION LEON X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=203519531; y=HMX31H3kNiRm5YxQLgorlahoVVgpVN3VMhsY_OUbHsm01cqr2w X-Yahoo-Profile: silva_cass Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 34267 Hi Leon, I sent your ABC theory to Alvaro and invited him to ask you any questions he may have. I hope you don't mind. Cass Cass, Thanks for sending this pages. I printed them several years ago, but had lost the link. The model they present, in my oppinion, is very intuitive: this "fractal division" of principles, beginning with the yin-yang bigger symbol also give a lot of information, as for instance, that every "upper circle" tends to orient "towards the abstract/subjective" and every "lower circle" tends to orient towads the formal/objective. So, the four progressions of divisions/fractalizations give us many sides to each "Human Principle"/chakra. It's useful to draw each step to see this mechanism applied to every scale. The circulations/arrows are only put at the end, to help visualize this dynamics. I don't know if you like to draw. But for me it's very helpful to understand information presented in organized patterns as these pictures you sent. Alvaro --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail Beta. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bscaro@yahoo.com Mon Jul 03 08:45:47 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: bscaro@yahoo.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 89497 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2006 15:35:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.172) by m32.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Jul 2006 15:35:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n18c.bullet.sc5.yahoo.com) (66.163.187.209) by mta4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Jul 2006 15:35:50 -0000 Received: from [66.163.187.122] by n18.bullet.sc5.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Jul 2006 15:35:35 -0000 Received: from [66.218.69.2] by t3.bullet.sc5.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Jul 2006 15:35:35 -0000 Received: from [66.218.66.75] by t2.bullet.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Jul 2006 15:35:35 -0000 Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2006 15:35:33 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Message-ID: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-compose X-Originating-IP: 66.163.187.209 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:6:0:0 X-Yahoo-Post-IP: 144.136.107.7 From: "bscaro" Subject: 'Rubicon' journal X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=61212351; y=getkj84eXSEXTR1xxcYcp9wrcN9udFRRyClEkbicvoGk X-Yahoo-Profile: bscaro X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 34268 Hi I'm trying to find any information I can about an occult journal=20 called 'Rubicon' that was edited in Australia some years back. Is anyone here aware of it - it may deal with some theosophists and=20 those connected to the TS in Australia in some way, like Vyvyan Deacon. Best regards Ben From proto37@yahoo.com Mon Jul 03 08:57:49 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: proto37@yahoo.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 92511 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2006 15:57:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.67.36) by m36.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Jul 2006 15:57:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO web32514.mail.mud.yahoo.com) (68.142.207.224) by mta10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Jul 2006 15:57:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 19661 invoked by uid 60001); 3 Jul 2006 15:56:43 -0000 Message-ID: <20060703155643.19659.qmail@web32514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [4.252.71.52] by web32514.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 03 Jul 2006 08:56:43 PDT Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 08:56:43 -0700 (PDT) To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: 68.142.207.224 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 From: Mark Jaqua Subject: Critical Notes on HPB Letters X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=130276474; y=Mn5N5FkuLQpoD6D25VQLHguoH5sopu5zCuMhacCoYD75VQ X-Yahoo-Profile: proto37 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 34269 I compiled some notes and remarks of others on the Letters of HPB, vol. 1, which might be of interest to readers still trying to sort the jumble out: - jake jaqua SOME CRITICAL NOTES ON LETTERS OF H.P. BLAVATSKY, VOL. I p. xv. - "... John [Cooper] died before completing the project of even his doctorate, which was awarded posthumously." This could be interpreted as an unnecessary slight at Cooper (not even a Doctor!), and his implied inferior status as an editor. But the post-humous degree is worth mentioning for the record. Cooper's doctoral project was the Blavatsky Letters project, at the University of Sydney, with which he was almost finished with Volume I at his death from a heart-attack at 67 yrs. His Master's thesis was also a Theosophical topic. Just before his death "John stated that the first volume (of an anticipated three volume collection) was nearly ready for Quest/TPH-Wheaton to publish." (Theosophical History, Vol. VII, No. 4, Oct. 1998, pp. 135-6, quoting Fohat, Vol II, No. 2, Summer, 1998, pp. 44-45. ) In reference to the Letters, he posted on Nov. 3, 1997 on the Theos-World web site: "My major news is that the first volume of The Collected Letters of H.P. Blavatsky is almost completed. Wheaton will be sending me back shortly the second proof of the text of the letters and their annotations... The c. 350 letters range from 1862 to 1882, with about 100 letters that are new to the theosophical world...." (Ibid., Eklund, p. 142) There are 136 letters in the present Volume, including to January, 1879. Algeo remarks that he could not use Cooper's work "directly." John P. Deveney did a review of the Letters in Theosophical History (Vol. XI, No. 3) and writes: "The editor [John Algeo] in his preface acknowledges the Herculean labors of the late John Cooper in adding to the corpus of letters and in preparing them for publication, but states that, for unspecified reasons, none of Cooper's work could be used 'directly,' and that even his transcriptions of texts were not used because they were 'not accurate.' This is a surprising charge, directed as it is toward a person known for his meticulous work and now unavailable to defend himself...." Fohat editor R. Bruce MacDonald explains: "To put it less diplomatically, this excuse by John Algeo is pure politics and to the average member of the Theosophical Society, incomprehensible." (Vol. VIII, No. 3) Daniel Caldwell has argued that Cooper also intended to include the Solovyoff/Aksakoff letters in his versions, and thus Cooper's version of the Letters may have been equally controversial. (email of Oct. 24, 04 to Wheeler on "Theosophy Canada" website. ) Dara Eklund says that Boris de Zirkoff intended to include them in his planned publication also ("The Logic of Debate," "Theosophy Canada" website), but how and with what commentary is only hearsay. MacDonald remarks that if Cooper and de Zirkoff intended to print the phoney letters in the same manner, then they were wrong also. He also writes: "The way these letters were presented makes them at the very least a type of innuendo. In as much as they are putting word's into Blavatsky's mouth, they are much worse than innuendo." Forging is a worse crime than false gossip, bad enough itself. Does a doctorate mean anything whatsoever to understanding Blavatsky? It only greases the wheels of conventionality of being "in the academy," gives some editorial skill, and opens purse-strings. Otherwise it is a hindrance. Purucker made the statement somewhere to Helen Todd that one of a Theosophist's greatest difficulties was unlearning what they had learned in conventional sciences. Blavatsky - who all this 125 years of controversy is about - had no degrees whatsoever. On the title page the book is edited by John Algeo and assisted by his wife Adele S. Algeo. The "editorial committee" is given as Daniel H. Caldwell, Dara Eklund, Robert Ellwood, Joy Mills, and Nicholas Weeks. John Cooper is not given a credit on the title page. Of the limited comments I've seen from members of the "Editorial Committe," the impression I have is that basically 99% of the work was done by Algeo and his wife, and the committe was used mostly for passive "rubber stamping" whatever he wanted to do. Perhaps some of them were just over-awed by being a member of the committee and lost their discrimination. Three of the members I have some familiarity with, and thought before of them as staunch Blavatsky defenders, who would not have approved the publishing of the many false and altered letters that were published in this Volume on equal footing with the genuine correspondence. Criticism aside, one must say also that there is a good deal of admirable scholarship in the book, supporting information and notes, and the book is well-organized. ------------ Letter 7, pp. 23-31 - This is a stupid, slavish, and money-seeking letter quite unlike Blavatsky. On p. 31 Algeo gives the source in the Russian archives of the supposed original but was unsuccessful in getting a copy. If the original really exists, it still seems a phoney letter. Comparison of hand-writing would be useful, but even that can be forged in the extreme case. Since this and some of the following letters have a similar tone and style to them, maybe someone in this time period was writing letters in Blavatsky's name for unknown reason, perhaps a knowledgable enemy of her or her family, as written when she was in Russia. Letter 8, pp. 33-35. - The tone of this letter is stupid and slavish, much like Letter 7, two things Blavatsky was not. Unless it be attributed to youth, she was 42 at the time. It might be compared with the quality and style of her article published at the same time, "Marvellous Spirit Manifestations." (CW: 1:30-4) No original available, but based on her enemy Soloyoff's publication. In it she claims to have finished Dicken's unfinished novel "Edwin Drood," which would have been significant. If true, she surely would have at least made a comment on it later in life, which wasn't remarked upon later in any of the mass of biographical material or letters (other than the doubtful Letter 8.) Algeo doesn't remark here or in other letters that it is another thought to be phoney, but just that "she wrote the following letter.... to Aksakoff." Letter 11, pp. 44-46 - This is another Solovyoff phoney alteration or composition by someone, with the same un-Blavatsky-like style and stupidity, as appears in all the other Solovyoff letters. When Solovyoff published them, why didn't Prof. Aksakoff protest about them if they were phoney? Most often people do nothing, unfortunately, is one explanation. Perhaps he had turned into an enemy, too, or any of other possible reasons. Maybe he was broke, and got a pay-off. These Solovyoff letters are the only ones in which she repeatedly laments about her supposed horrible immoral past. Why doesn't she ever refer to this in similar terms in any of her letters that are known to be genuine? She always demonstrated the opposite attitude - being proud of succeeding to run away from her older husband, Blavatsky, instead of considering it "immoral" as implied here. Compare what she is made to say in this letter about spiritualist Andrew Jackson Davis: "..... who feels and reads men more clearly than any book (and this no one doubts who knows him)....", with what she says about him in a genuine letter with the original: "... Jack Davis and Judge Edmonds are but school boys just trying to spell their A.B.C...." (Letter 21, p. 87) In this Letter 11, Solovyoff has HPB writing: "......"I have heard of Madame Blavatsky from one of her parents, who spoke of her as a rather strong medium. Unfortunately, her communications reflect her morals, which have not been very strict." Whoever it was who told you about me, they told you, the truth, in essence, if not in detail. (p. 44) R. Bruce MacDonald writes on this: "..... the only parent that Aksakoff could be referring to is Blavatsky's father who had already been dead over a year at this time. Blavatsky's mother died while she was a child and referring to a child as a medium with lax morals makes no sense. If it was clearly her father, why didn't she say, "What my father told you was true", rather than the awkward phrase she used? Why also would a European family of nobility be going about telling complete strangers about a family member's lax morality and her practice of mediumship? This does not seem credible, especially coming from the father. Also, who would write to another person 'her communications reflect her morals'? What does that even mean?" (Fohat Supplement, Fall, 2004) Does it seem genuine for Aksakoff to start right out in his first letter to HPB by insulting her? Letter 12, pp. 46-52 - Written in the same phoney Soloyoff style, with none of the "sparkle" and true wit of HPB's genuine letters. 'Again slavish and self-effacing about her supposed immoral past, not found in any of her genuine letters. Most of the Solovyoff published letters do not show the typical Blvatsky style. She refers to Olcott several places with deferment and admiration of his book, respectability and work with spiritualism - something else almost entirely uncharacteristic of Blavatsky, as she almost always sprinkled references to Olcott with chatisement of his various "flapdoodles", and never of him as her superior. The criticism of the Solovyoff-Aksadoff transcriptions as forgery and mis-transcription has all been placed on Solovyoff's head, and justly so as his other transcriptions are just as bad. Since there's no evidence of Aksakoff coming to HPB's defense, it is also possible that Solovyoff got only copies from Aksakoff and Aksakoff corrupted his own copies as well. Letter 13, pp. 52-57: - This letter to her family does sound like Blavatsky, although it was written in the same time period as the false-sounding ones published by Solovyoff. HPB re-wrote and edited this letter herself for Sinnett for his Incidents in the Life of Madame Blavatsky. (p. 55) Most likely they sound like two different people writing the letters, because they were two different people, because the writer (or editor and re-writer) of the Solovyoff published letters was Solovyoff himself! (Perhaps with even some help from Aksakoff, after HPB turned against spiritualism.) Algeo remarks in his introduction that Blavatsky wrote Aksakoff as a "true believer" in Spiritualism, which was just a pose for Aksakoff's benefit. This letter 13 to her family is certainly full of her real knowledge of the dangers of spiritualism. Perhaps the Aksakoff-Solovyoff letters make HPB sound like a "true believer" because who ever wrote them thought that was HPB's real perspective. The Solovyoff letters also demonstrate none of the flashes of deep insight behind the nature of things that HPB's genuine letters do. In the Solovyoff published letters HPB is made to remark on her impoverished state or pleas for money or work in a slavish way. In the Feb., '75 Letter 18 to Aksakoff she implied she is worried about enough to eat. (p. 73), while in some genuine letters of the same time within about a month she writes: "...I wonder if I could not have it published in the "Springfield Republican" by paying for it? I am ready to pay any sum of money for it," (March 6, 1975, Letter 24, p. 93); and ".... I will have it printed... and pay for it anything they like..." (March 7, 1975, Letter 25, p. 95). So at the same time period the Solovyoff letter shows HPB penniless, while two genuine letters show her well-off. Algeo writes: "HPB's father died on July 27, 1873, but because the family did not know where she was at the time, she did not hear the news until several months later, after which she also received some money as her share of the estate." (pp. 32) Algeo says that in the fall of '74 she received a part of her inheritance, but it was likely earlier, as on June 22, 1874 HPB invested in some farmland on Long Island. (pp. 32) In other words, she had money. Yet in the Solovyoff-Aksakoff letters of Oct. and Nov., 1874, (nos. 8, 11) he has her pleading for translation work and impoverished after her inheritance came through: "Would it not be possible for me to send you.... translations of articles..." (p. 34); and ".... my means are very small, and I am obliged to live by my work, translating and writing in the papers." (pp. 45). In March, '75 she is paying "any sum" to publish an article of someone's. So, it is known she had money before and after this Nov., '74 letter, but Solovyoff has her falsely impoverished at the time. (However, by the end of March, '75 she appears to be broke again, as "... $50, scraped off the bottom of an empty purse..." in a genuine letter to Corson [No. 30].) In Letter 45, May 25, '75, Solovyoff has her boasting of making $6000 in the year so far, and also totally broke, "... my last $200." (p. 172) The $6000 seems impossibly high. In Letter 54 to Aksakoff (July 18, '75) Solovyoff has her saying "... I am living from hand to mouth and earning from $10 to $15 when necessity arises." In a genuine Letter 64 to Corson (Jan. 8, '76) she says that the New York Sun would pay her for $30 per article for an article a week. (p. 236) Letter 17, pp. 70-73: - This Solovyoff-Aksakoff letter seems genuine enough with much of the typical HPB spirit in it. There is a lack of the servility as in the other letters and the attitude toward Olcott is more typical HPB. Solovyoff didn't necessarily have to alter all of his HPB letters. Without some of the genuine Blavatsky writing-style, it would have been a poor book to sell. While the well-known "boar in the forest" letter is not in this collection, some of Soloyoff's and translator's apparent tampering and obfuscating methods, and the confusion surrounding it all, might be seen in the following quote of HPB's sister from Vania* in Endersby's Hall of Magic Mirrors** (pp. 59-60): "Some of the history of Solovioff is in order here. Even [translator] Walter Leaf himself threw doubt on some of his statements at times and one of the letters he questions is (B) on p. 288 of Solovioff's book.*** "Vera Jelihovsky, H.P.B.'s sister, published the following, reproduced by Vania: 'The chief point of this translation (into French; see Solovioff 316-20) I was told (I may observe that I cannot guarantee the exact truth of this statement, for I repeat that no one would ever show me the letter in French) lay in the fact that in it Madame Blavatsky denied the Mahatmas, and admitted that she had invented their existence.... But as the readers know, in the Russian letter there is nothing of the sort. How did it get into the translation?" In pursuing this, she saw Solovioff and asked for the translation. He said that he had neither the original nor a copy; it was in the hands of a Madame M. in Paris. He also refused to give her a copy of the Russian, but would not explain. She then went to Baissac, the translator, who also did not have a copy of the translation, but said positively that there was no such confession in it. (This is the famous "Boar in the Forest" letter which is in the Corson collection; Symonds asked Baissac to get her a copy of the French translation from Mme. M. Three weeks later he wrote her that Mme. M. didn't have a copy either. The mystery of this translation is bogged down in Paris to this day. But it is only a sample of Solovioff - though oddly, Kingsland quotes a passage from him which seems extremely critical of Hodgson himself. (Mme. M. was Madame Morsier. After her Lodge was destroyed by this translation, Solovioff got it back and hung on to it.) -------------- * VANIA, K.F. - Madame H.P. Blavatsky, Sat. Pub. Co., Bombay, 1951 ** Endersby, V.A., The Hall of Magic Mirrors, Carlton Press, N.Y., N.Y., 1969 *** SOLOVYOFF, V.S. - A Modern Priestess of Isis (1895). ------------------ Letter 19, p. 74: - This might indicate some of the intrigue and general aura behind some of these letters, as Algeo remarks that this partial letter, found in the Philosophic Research Society archives, was from and apparently ripped out of an Adyar scrapbook. Letters nos. 108, 115, 116, 117a, 118, and 125, pp 399-464s: - How completely unreliable some "translations" or transcriptions may be is brought out by Algeo on pp. 401, (and worth reading the section in whole) on Eleanor Sidgwick's copies of HPB letters to H. Chintamon, Letters nos. 108, 115, 116, 117a, 118, and 125: "... The copies were probably made by Eleanor Sidgwick, who freely abbreviated and paraphased the material and interjected personal opinions about it. She rephrased passages and described what she saw in the letters, often writing about HPB, rather than recording HPB's actual words...." It was like she was made to do something in spite of hatred for HPB, and thus actually refusing to do it by doing it in the worse and most insinuating way, it not being valuable enough in her conventional christian mind to actually transcribe. She even skipped whole pages of philosophy ("... a page and a half about pantheism etc..." - p. 428, No. 115) which she probably found booring. 'And this under the aegis of an organization posing on its supposed scientific exact methods, the SPR or British Society for Psychical Research! (Solovyoff likely suffered a similar transcription disease, on personal animosity basis.) One "quote" seems particularly Sidgwick commentary falsely posing as HPB's thought: ".... Edison a Theosophist - description of phonograph - (graphic and clear) - .... phonographs might as easily as not be placed in the statues of the caves of Ellora and Elephanta and the gods made to speak to the multitudes for hours - truth and to convert them to pure atheism by the thousands." Rather stupid, and HPB didn't believe in conventional atheism, as it is equivalent to materialism. Two versions of supposedly the same short (in transcription) Letter 117 are given, one from Sidgwick, one from "Sarda" published in a book. They have almost no similarity other than mentioning the shipping of 250 books, so one really wonders what is really going on here. Are they different letters, or are each trimmed down so extensively that they nearly don't overlap in subject. Algeo remarks that it "... raises the question of how much has been ommitted from other letters..." (p. 433) The "proposed letters" to Massey and Kislingbury within Letter 118, pp. 436-7, seems incredibly pompous to be HPB's and may be more Sidgwick's imaginative rendition and additions than anything. (The Sidgwick copy was made after SPR's "Hodgson Case" and she probably viewed HPB as some sort of scammer.) There are 8 Letters included written to Chintaman. No. 120 there is an original for, and No. 112 was included in the "Hodgson Report." Both of these seem genuine and in the Blavatsky style, while all of the other 6 letters from Sidgwick are corrupted and unreliable, varying from probably genuine Blavatsky to the Sidgwick-biped writing and imagination. ---------------- That HPB had enemies and thus those motivated to alter or write phoney letters is probably contested by few. Persons writing anonymous threatening letters certainly have the motivation if not necessarily the skill. HPB writes, "I have received anonymous letters, threatening messages and insulting warnings but only feel as laughing at them." (p. 102) Elswhere, in Letter 67 to Mrs. Corson, she writes: "Here now is the great moment! Mme Blavatsky although the daughter of her forefathers is an immoral woman, a woman who has had loads of lovers. While Dr Bloede secretly spreads the tale in Brooklyn that I have had a criminal liaison with the Pope and Bismarck, Mr Home, that untrained medium, pours his venom over me in Europe. More than that, I, who have worked 18 hours a day since last summer, I am accused in anonymous letters sent to my women friends, who bring them to me indignantly (like Emma Har: Brittain for example) of frequenting houses of assignation. They offer to lead Emma H.B. to these spots and to give her proofs that I was there the very same day and hour that she spent an entire day with me!" (pp. 252-3) The Solovyoff-Aksakoff letters are also not entire letters, but partial letters and excerpts made by Solovyoff. Of course meaning and context can be altered this way to the editors pleasure by eliminating important or explanatory remarks. (But who would need to do this who also would alter the letters themselves!) In a genuine letter to Aksakoff, or which there is an original (Letter 127, pp. 468-9), there's none of the slavish spirit, and although she makes fun of her self ("... my manners of a Prussian grenadier on furlough leave...."), there isn't any false lamenting of a supposedly "immoral" past. -------------- For effect, below is a compilation of self-incriminating and slavish type excerpts from the Blavatsky-to-Aksakoff letters transcribed by Solovyoff in Volume I of TPH's Blavatsky Letters. Ask oneself if this sounds like the real Blavatsky found in letters known to be genuine, or if this is Solovyoff forging and mis-transcribing Blavatsky letters, and if they should be included alongside in a Volume of genuine Letters: - No. 11, pp. 44-46: - "'... her (HPB's) morals, which have not been very strict.' Whoever it was who told you about me, they told you, the truth.... the deep sorrow which I long have known for the irrevocable past.... Morality and virtue I regarded as a social garment, for the sake of propriety.... I see that there is no salvation for me but death.... Do not reveal to him that which, if he knew it and were convinced, would force me to escape to the ends of the Earth...." No. 12, pp. 47-50: - ".... to depise me for my sad reputation in the past... If I have any hope for the future, it is only beyond the grave, when bright spirits shall help me to free myself from my sinful and impure envelope.... my accursed name of Blavatsky. I do not dare to risk signing my name to any book. It might raise reminiscences too dangerous for me..... These are the bitter fruits of my youth devoted to Satan, his pomps and works!.... No. 17, pp. 71-72: - "... the Blavatsky of many sins... In the Lord do we put our trust, nor shall we be shamed forever.... my aunts and sister.... I am no credit to them... Here I am at least a human being; while there, I am - Blavatsky...." No. 33, p. 126: - "... there is only one thing I am seeking and struggling for - that people should forget the former Blavatsky...." No. 55, p. 195: - "Oh, if only no one knew me in St. Petersburg!" No. 69, p. 260: - ".... I really cannot, just because the devil got me into trouble in my youth, go and rip up my stomach now like a Japanese suicide... My position is cheerless - simply helpless. There is nothing left but to start for Australia and change my name forever." No. 94, p. 361: - "... because of my shame and sorrow, I am going where no one knows me... Home's malignity has ruined me forever in Europe." ---------------- Fohat editor MacDonald writes on dubious letters and forged excerpts ascribed to Blavatsky: "Students who have read volumes of Blavatsky's works with an earnest desire to understand, begin to be able to identify the rhythm of her work and whereas they may not take much notice of the rhythm when it is there, they certainly notice when it is not. [I would go further to say that words have their own energy and are reflective of the person doing the writing, the problem with the letters in question is that they do in fact give off a bad 'vibe.'" (10-24-04 email, "Theosophy Canada" website.) He also suggests that a possible improper motive for publishing phoney Blavatsky letters, may be that it will chase the superficial people away - or the "swine", and the deeper student will see through the phoniness to the "pearls" of the genuine material! - which I don't believe holds water either. Lucifer7 editor Katinka Hesselink wrote: "In reading the book it wasn't clear to me that these letters were probably fabrications. If it isn't automatically clear to me, the same goes for other readers, I'm sure." (Oct. 30, '04, ibid.) One has to read a large volume of Blavatsky material to get the persona and style and know what doesn't fit in or "ring true." Universal opinion among the critics is that the Letters are not delineated clearly enough as to which letters are suspect and which are not, but just published alongside each other willy-nilly, with occasional comment as tho their suspect authenticity. A separate appendix for suspect letters is often mentioned, if they were to be published at all. The "dead fish" attitude of academics with no discrimination or intuition is castigated often in one form or another, the "letter" of the work instead of a genuine or ingenuine underlying "spirit" of it. --------------------------- Letter 88, pp. 314-328: - HPB writes to her aunt about her "foolish" younger life and mentions the "devil" philosophically as an opposing principle, and this may be of similar nature to her comments to Aksakoff about her younger life, which Solovyoff mis-transcribed and altered for his own purposes. I think she is referring almost exclusively about the eternal pain in the posterior she caused for her family in her constant rebellion and independent nature while a child and adolescent. She writes: ".... The Devil, or rather the idea of an opposing power, is the lever of Archimedes on which the world turns. It is a field where grows the good, for wherever the manure is the richest, the grain grows best. Had I not been the devil knows what, to my shame and sorrow (one cannot relive one's past, one can only try to erase it according to one's strength), if I had not been foolish in my younger days, I would not have been able, as I have done, to place seven people on the true path." (p. 326) She again refers to herself as a young social embarassment in Letter 92 to her aunt: "....If I had been born a Buddhist and not a Christian, I would not have shamed the heads of those whom I loved more than all else in the world, grandmother and aunt and yourself and the whole family." (p. 346) Marrying Nikifor Blavatsky in 1849 at 17 or 18 and then running away from him, is probably the chief thought, which most Theosophists probably find admirable instead. Letter 92, pp. 342-59: - For a good example of how much differing versions and excerpts of a letter can differ for which an original is available, see the Original and the two other published versions of this letter. ------------------ NO ULTIMATE PROOFS How can there be a final proof to the genuiness of a letter is some one is able to perfectly mimic someone else's handwriting? There cannot be. Yet this is the case as proved in later years to Mme. Blavatsky when Indian Judge Khandalavala showed her a perfect copy of her own handwriting which he had made. (The Judge Case, Ernest E. Pelletier, Edmonton T.S., 2004, Part I, pp. 379-381) This has to be likened to an occult ability, more than just a physical skill. HPB wrote in a letter to Sinnett about a letter she had received from Khandalavala (Dec. 29, '85): "I send you a funny thing. Read the 3rd, 4th, & 5th & 6th lines. This is undeniably my handwriting. Kandhalavala copied it from my letter to him. When I received and saw it I was positively startled. Let me write it 'staunch fearless friends whose devotion to the Master and yourself has not wavered one hair's breath' - I wrote it without looking at it, so as not to be impeded by the desire of copying it. Now I ask you, were such a letter a whole letter written in the same handwriting as these two 1/2 lines wouldn't [you] swear it was my handwriting? Please put it carefully away and keep it. Why Khandalaval should have coped that sentence in my handwiting I do not know. Once he had written three letters copied from my own and brought them to me and I swore to them myself, not knowing what he meant... I tell you these lines are in my handwriting and I, the first, would swear to them in any Court." (Letters of Blavatsky to Sinnett, TUP, No. LXIII, p. 158) K.H. remarks on his and Blavatsky's handwriting being forged in the Mahatma Letters. (TUP, p. 431) M.'s handwriting was forged in ".... five or six other letters in his handwriting emanating from the Dugpa who has charge of Fern." (ibid., p. 294) K.H. remarks on the difference between a "clumsy" forger and an occult or clever one: ".... Mr. Massey, I see, makes no difference between an 'occult' and a common forger such as his legal experience may have made him acquainted with. An 'occult' forger a dugpa would have forged the letter precisely in this tone. He would have never become guilty of being carried away by his personal grudge, so as to deprive his letter of its cleverest feature. The T.S. would not be shown by him 'a superstructure upon fraud,' and it is 'the very opposite impression' that is its crown. I say is for half of the letter is a forgery and a very occult one." (ibid., 419) So it is nearly impossible to get any final proof on the genuiness of a difficult letter, even the proper attitude can be faked, let alone the handwriting itself, although most cases aren't this worse scenario. Ultimately one may have only personal discrimination, and that is subjective. -------------- Letter 33, pp. 126-27: - Solovyoff again has HPB apparently lamenting her horrible moral past. The only "vices" that she ever directly refers to elsewhere are the victorian ones of smoking and swearing (in Russian!). (Letter 30 to Corson) Letter 61, pp. 214-15: - This Solovyoff-Aksakoff letter has HPB say that ".... the rules of the Society [T.S.] are so strict that it is impossible for a man who has been associated in any disreputable matter to become a member." Yet, Solovyoff has her claiming disreputability herself in previous letters. Letter 76, p. 288: - Solovyoff has Blavatsky being present on the killing of a cat in an occult experiement. This seems unlikely, as Blavatsky's teachers didn't believe even in unnecessarily killing a mosquito. (reference in a Mahatma Letter) ------------------ TRAIN TRIP TO NEVADA Letter 121, pp. 443-51: - (A "probably date" of July 3, 1878) HPB tells N. de Fadyev of a trip to Nevada and also mentions "Milwaukee." In his commentary Dr. Algeo remarks that: "The episode has a fictional air about it. It is not improbably that HPB, who was known for the stories she told her relatives and companions in their childhood, is still making up a good yarn for them." On p. 416 Algeo also refers to this trip and says ".... which the evidence also suggests did not occur", in spite of HPB describing it. The complaint may be that there is not enough time for this trip as de Zirkoff's schedule for HPB that month doesn't allow enough time, or that the dates aren't consistent with it. Considering (from the "Wikipedia" online encyclopedia entry pasted below) one could get to Nevada, at least, and back in less than a week via the "Transcontinental Express," - a quick trip to Nevada would have been easily accomplished, with few taking note of it. Milwaukee would have to have been a short side-jaunt north from Chicago from the Trans-continental route. Also, this letter (#121) also has a "page in the orignal letter missing", so could be parts of two different letters, leaving much more uncertainty as to just what times are what. Zirkoff's chronology (p. 451) would allow up to 12 days for this trip - plenty of time, although the various dates and HPB's "3 days ago" do not synch - unless the letter is mis-dated, or considering the "missing page/s" this letter was written in two or more installments, as people sometimes do in relating events to family. The missing page/s may have had more information. On June 4th, HPB (and Olcott?) were with Belle Mitchell in New Jersey, and again on June 16th HPB was with Mitchell. Olcott, in Albany on this date, could have taken a connection on the railway journey back. Also, when one is going on a trip, it is common practice to stay with someone near the station to get a ride to the station, with the same person picking them up on the return journey, Belle Mitchell in this case. (Hoboken, New Jersey is just outside New York City.) "Between 1865 and 1869 the Union Pacific laid 1,086 miles and the Central Pacific 689 miles of track. The years immediately following the construction of the railway were years of astounding growth for the United States, largely due to the speed and ease of travel this railroad provided. For example, on June 4,1876 an express train called the Transcontinental Express arrived in San Francisco, California via the First Transcontinental Railroad only 83 hours and 39 minutes after it left from New York City Only 10 years before the same journey would have taken months overland and weeks on ship." ( ) Letter 121 also carries the fantastical account of Krishnavarma, who is not mentioned elsewhere in the literature (There are 2 different Krishnavarmas), $20,000 in gold from him for the Society, a business venture in the West, and some events along the way. Algeo writes: "The episode has a fictional air about it. It is not improbably that HPB, who was known for the stories she told her relatives and companions in their childhood, is still making up a good yarn for them." After all, though, we are dealing with Mme. Blavatsky, who's whole life was fantastical, and it is hardly fair to equate this with for making up stories in childhood for her friends entertainment, who knew they were made up. If Olcott did not report this trip and Krishnavarma in his "Old Diary Leaves - 6 Vols., (there were TWO Krishnavarma's - the other one connected with the Arya Samaj) it may have been because the money involved and the trip to get it was an uncomfortable area, and also Krishnavarma's servant threw one guy in a ditch and hit another guy while being harrassed - which would also be an uncomfortable subject for Olcott, and maybe have legal implications. Algeo is referring in the quote to accounts of HPB's childhood by her aunt Mme Nadejda Fadeef, and sister Vera Jelihovsky. Fadeef refers to her "exuberance of imagination and wonderful sensitiveness.... she would spend hours and days quietly whispering, as people thought, to herself, and narrating, with no one hear her, in some dark corner, marvellous tales of travels in bright stars and other worlds...." Helena used to wander the cellar catacombs of her grandfather's estate and have hiding places to escape lessons. "Once or twice she could hardly be found in those damp subterranean corridors, having in her endeavours to escape detection lost her way in the labyrinth. For all this, she was not in the least daunted or repentant, for, as she assured us, she was never there alone, but in the company of her little 'hunch-backs' and playmates." In the children's hide-away beyond a ruined garden and in the virgin forest, "For hours at a time she used to narrate to us younger children, and even to her seniors in years, the most incredible stories with the cool assurance and conviction of an eye witness, and one who knew what she was talking about." ( Personal Memoirs of H.P. Blavatsky, compiled by Mary K. Neff, E.P. Dutton, N.Y., 1937, pp. 23-31. Neff says the stories were maybe clairvoyance and not fancy.) The "20,000 in gold" wasn't the only case of HPB handling large amounts of money for her work. Olcott, in "Old Diary Leaves" * (Vol. I, pp. 440-41), relates Mme. Blavatsky having a suitcase of money (23,000 francs) of the Adepts', and told to deliver it to an unknown man at a certain address, who happened to be sitting at a table writing his own suicide note, with a revolver at his side. (He had been swindled previously of the sum of money, and needed for some Adept purposes.) The account reads: "... When H.P.B. was ordered from Paris to New York in 1873, she soon found herself in the most dismal want, having, as stated in a previous chapter, to boil her coffee-dregs over and over again for lack of pence for buying a fresh supply; and to keep off starvation, at last had to work with her needle for a maker of cravats. She got no presents from unexpected sources, found no fairy-gold on her mattress on waking in the morning. The time ws not yet. But, although she was in such stark poverty herself, she had lying in her trunk for some time after her arrival a large sum of money (I think something like 23,000 francs) which had been confided to her by the Master, to await orders. The order finally came to her to go to Buffalo. Where that was or how to reach it, she had not the remotest idea until she enquired: What to do at Buffalo? 'No matter what: take the money with you.' On reaching her destination whe was told to take a hack and drive to such an address, and give the money to such and such a person; to make no explanations, but to take his receipt and come away. She did so: the man was found at the address given, and found in peculiar conditions. He was writing a farewell letter to his family, with a loaded pistol on the table with which he would have shot himself in another half hour if H.P.B. had not come. It seems - as she told me subsequently - that this was a most worthy man who had been robbed of the 23,000 francs in some peculiar way that made it necessary, for the sake of events that would subsequently happen as a consequence - events of importance to the world - that he should have the money restored to him at a particular crisis, and H.P.B. was the agent deputed to this act of beneficence. When we met she had entirely forgotten the man's name, his street and number. Here we have a casse where the very agent chosen to carry the money to the beneficiary was herself in most necessitous circumstances, yet not permitted to use one franc of the trust fund to buy herself a pound of fresh coffee." (Old Diary Leaves, Vol. I, pp. 440-41) ------------- A question might be also is if HPB wrote all her own letters. Officers for organizations if overwhelmed with correspondence sometimes as accepted practice have assistants answer letters under the officer's name. I think somewhere Mead remarks that HPB had people answer her letters sometimes. ------------------------- --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From carlosaveline@terra.com.br Mon Jul 03 12:22:36 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: carlosaveline@terra.com.br X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 88220 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2006 19:21:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m36.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Jul 2006 19:21:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO buniche.hst.terra.com.br) (200.176.10.197) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Jul 2006 19:21:38 -0000 Received: from fomboni.hst.terra.com.br (fomboni.hst.terra.com.br [200.176.10.15]) by buniche.hst.terra.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EACC3DD80C1 for ; Mon, 3 Jul 2006 16:20:03 -0300 (BRT) X-Terra-Karma: 0% X-Terra-Hash: b9a5af31d7e5a7e732558e43fc4553f0 Received-SPF: pass (fomboni.hst.terra.com.br: domain of terra.com.br designates 200.176.10.15 as permitted sender) client-ip=200.176.10.15; envelope-from=carlosaveline@terra.com.br; helo=terra.com.br; Received: from terra.com.br (bengazi.hst.terra.com.br [200.176.3.176]) (authenticated user carlosaveline) by fomboni.hst.terra.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43CDC109006A for ; Mon, 3 Jul 2006 16:20:03 -0300 (BRT) Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 16:20:02 -0300 Message-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Sensitivity: 3 To: "theos-talk" X-XaM3-API-Version: 4.1 (B115) X-SenderIP: 201.15.76.9 X-Originating-IP: 200.176.10.197 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 From: "carlosaveline" Subject: Re: On HPB Letters X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=264889858; y=flTO00_XVEfQP4kSGJKJlVpd22_KIG83jGenYxjz9uRiT8mXVTD_I-w X-Yahoo-Profile: cardosoaveline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 34270 Dear Mark. Thank you very much for your important contribution below.=20=20 I will read it carefully and then comment it.=20 Regards, Carlos Cardoso Aveline=20=20 De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com C=F3pia: Data:Mon, 3 Jul 2006 08:56:43 -0700 (PDT) Assunto:[Spam] Theos-World Critical Notes on HPB Letters > I compiled some notes and remarks of others on the Letters of HPB, vol. 1= , which might be of interest to readers still trying to sort the jumble out= : > - jake jaqua > SOME CRITICAL NOTES ON LETTERS OF H.P. BLAVATSKY, VOL. I > p. xv. - "... John [Cooper] died before completing the project of even hi= s doctorate, which was awarded posthumously." This could be interpreted as = an unnecessary slight at Cooper (not even a Doctor!), and his implied infer= ior status as an editor. But the post-humous degree is worth mentioning for= the record. Cooper's doctoral project was the Blavatsky Letters project, a= t the University of Sydney, with which he was almost finished with Volume I= at his death from a heart-attack at 67 yrs. His Master's thesis was also a= Theosophical topic. Just before his death "John stated that the first volu= me (of an anticipated three volume collection) was nearly ready for Quest/T= PH-Wheaton to publish." (Theosophical History, Vol. VII, No. 4, Oct. 1998, = pp. 135-6, quoting Fohat, Vol II, No. 2, Summer, 1998, pp. 44-45. ) In refe= rence to the Letters, he posted on Nov. 3, 1997 on the Theos-World web site= : "My major news is that the first volume of The Collected Letters of H.P. > Blavatsky is almost completed. Wheaton will be sending me back shortly th= e second proof of the text of the letters and their annotations... The c. 3= 50 letters range from 1862 to 1882, with about 100 letters that are new to = the theosophical world...." (Ibid., Eklund, p. 142) There are 136 letters i= n the present Volume, including to January, 1879. > Algeo remarks that he could not use Cooper's work "directly." John P. Dev= eney did a review of the Letters in Theosophical History (Vol. XI, No. 3) a= nd writes: "The editor [John Algeo] in his preface acknowledges the Hercule= an labors of the late John Cooper in adding to the corpus of letters and in= preparing them for publication, but states that, for unspecified reasons, = none of Cooper's work could be used 'directly,' and that even his transcrip= tions of texts were not used because they were 'not accurate.' This is a su= rprising charge, directed as it is toward a person known for his meticulous= work and now unavailable to defend himself...." Fohat editor R. Bruce MacD= onald explains: "To put it less diplomatically, this excuse by John Algeo i= s pure politics and to the average member of the Theosophical Society, inco= mprehensible." (Vol. VIII, No. 3) > Daniel Caldwell has argued that Cooper also intended to include the Solov= yoff/Aksakoff letters in his versions, and thus Cooper's version of the Let= ters may have been equally controversial. (email of Oct. 24, 04 to Wheeler = on "Theosophy Canada" website. ) > Dara Eklund says that Boris de Zirkoff intended to include them in his pl= anned publication also ("The Logic of Debate," "Theosophy Canada" website),= but how and with what commentary is only hearsay. MacDonald remarks that i= f Cooper and de Zirkoff intended to print the phoney letters in the same ma= nner, then they were wrong also. He also writes: "The way these letters wer= e presented makes them at the very least a type of innuendo. In as much as = they are putting word's into Blavatsky's mouth, they are much worse than in= nuendo." Forging is a worse crime than false gossip, bad enough itself. > Does a doctorate mean anything whatsoever to understanding Blavatsky? It = only greases the wheels of conventionality of being "in the academy," gives= some editorial skill, and opens purse-strings. Otherwise it is a hindrance= . Purucker made the statement somewhere to Helen Todd that one of a Theosop= hist's greatest difficulties was unlearning what they had learned in conven= tional sciences. Blavatsky - who all this 125 years of controversy is about= - had no degrees whatsoever. > On the title page the book is edited by John Algeo and assisted by his wi= fe Adele S. Algeo. The "editorial committee" is given as Daniel H. Caldwell= , Dara Eklund, Robert Ellwood, Joy Mills, and Nicholas Weeks. John Cooper i= s not given a credit on the title page. Of the limited comments I've seen f= rom members of the "Editorial Committe," the impression I have is that basi= cally 99% of the work was done by Algeo and his wife, and the committe was = used mostly for passive "rubber stamping" whatever he wanted to do. Perhaps= some of them were just over-awed by being a member of the committee and lo= st their discrimination. Three of the members I have some familiarity with,= and thought before of them as staunch Blavatsky defenders, who would not h= ave approved the publishing of the many false and altered letters that were= published in this Volume on equal footing with the genuine correspondence.= Criticism aside, one must say also that there is a good deal of admirable > scholarship in the book, supporting information and notes, and the book i= s well-organized.=20 > ------------ > Letter 7, pp. 23-31 - This is a stupid, slavish, and money-seeking letter= quite unlike Blavatsky. On p. 31 Algeo gives the source in the Russian arc= hives of the supposed original but was unsuccessful in getting a copy. If t= he original really exists, it still seems a phoney letter. Comparison of ha= nd-writing would be useful, but even that can be forged in the extreme case= . Since this and some of the following letters have a similar tone and styl= e to them, maybe someone in this time period was writing letters in Blavats= ky's name for unknown reason, perhaps a knowledgable enemy of her or her fa= mily, as written when she was in Russia. > Letter 8, pp. 33-35. - The tone of this letter is stupid and slavish, muc= h like Letter 7, two things Blavatsky was not. Unless it be attributed to y= outh, she was 42 at the time. It might be compared with the quality and sty= le of her article published at the same time, "Marvellous Spirit Manifestat= ions." (CW: 1:30-4) No original available, but based on her enemy Soloyoff'= s publication. In it she claims to have finished Dicken's unfinished novel = "Edwin Drood," which would have been significant. If true, she surely would= have at least made a comment on it later in life, which wasn't remarked up= on later in any of the mass of biographical material or letters (other than= the doubtful Letter 8.) Algeo doesn't remark here or in other letters that= it is another thought to be phoney, but just that "she wrote the following= letter.... to Aksakoff."=20 > Letter 11, pp. 44-46 - This is another Solovyoff phoney alteration or com= position by someone, with the same un-Blavatsky-like style and stupidity, a= s appears in all the other Solovyoff letters. When Solovyoff published them= , why didn't Prof. Aksakoff protest about them if they were phoney? Most of= ten people do nothing, unfortunately, is one explanation. Perhaps he had tu= rned into an enemy, too, or any of other possible reasons. Maybe he was bro= ke, and got a pay-off. These Solovyoff letters are the only ones in which s= he repeatedly laments about her supposed horrible immoral past. Why doesn't= she ever refer to this in similar terms in any of her letters that are kno= wn to be genuine? She always demonstrated the opposite attitude - being pro= ud of succeeding to run away from her older husband, Blavatsky, instead of = considering it "immoral" as implied here. Compare what she is made to say i= n this letter about spiritualist Andrew Jackson Davis: "..... who feels and > reads men more clearly than any book (and this no one doubts who knows hi= m)....", with what she says about him in a genuine letter with the original= : "... Jack Davis and Judge Edmonds are but school boys just trying to spel= l their A.B.C...." (Letter 21, p. 87) > In this Letter 11, Solovyoff has HPB writing: "......"I have heard of Mad= ame Blavatsky from one of her parents, who spoke of her as a rather strong = medium. Unfortunately, her communications reflect her morals, which have no= t been very strict." Whoever it was who told you about me, they told you, t= he truth, in essence, if not in detail. (p. 44) R. Bruce MacDonald writes o= n this: "..... the only parent that Aksakoff could be referring to is Blava= tsky's father who had already been dead over a year at this time. Blavatsky= 's mother died while she was a child and referring to a child as a medium w= ith lax morals makes no sense. If it was clearly her father, why didn't she= say, "What my father told you was true", rather than the awkward phrase sh= e used? Why also would a European family of nobility be going about telling= complete strangers about a family member's lax morality and her practice o= f mediumship? This does not seem credible, especially coming from the fathe= r. Also, > who would write to another person 'her communications reflect her morals'= ? What does that even mean?" (Fohat Supplement, Fall, 2004) Does it seem ge= nuine for Aksakoff to start right out in his first letter to HPB by insulti= ng her?=20 >=20 > Letter 12, pp. 46-52 - Written in the same phoney Soloyoff style, with no= ne of the "sparkle" and true wit of HPB's genuine letters. 'Again slavish a= nd self-effacing about her supposed immoral past, not found in any of her g= enuine letters. Most of the Solovyoff published letters do not show the typ= ical Blvatsky style. She refers to Olcott several places with deferment and= admiration of his book, respectability and work with spiritualism - someth= ing else almost entirely uncharacteristic of Blavatsky, as she almost alway= s sprinkled references to Olcott with chatisement of his various "flapdoodl= es", and never of him as her superior.=20 > The criticism of the Solovyoff-Aksadoff transcriptions as forgery and mis= -transcription has all been placed on Solovyoff's head, and justly so as hi= s other transcriptions are just as bad. Since there's no evidence of Aksako= ff coming to HPB's defense, it is also possible that Solovyoff got only cop= ies from Aksakoff and Aksakoff corrupted his own copies as well.=20 > Letter 13, pp. 52-57: - This letter to her family does sound like Blavats= ky, although it was written in the same time period as the false-sounding o= nes published by Solovyoff. HPB re-wrote and edited this letter herself for= Sinnett for his Incidents in the Life of Madame Blavatsky. (p. 55) Most li= kely they sound like two different people writing the letters, because they= were two different people, because the writer (or editor and re-writer) of= the Solovyoff published letters was Solovyoff himself! (Perhaps with even = some help from Aksakoff, after HPB turned against spiritualism.) Algeo rema= rks in his introduction that Blavatsky wrote Aksakoff as a "true believer" = in Spiritualism, which was just a pose for Aksakoff's benefit. This letter = 13 to her family is certainly full of her real knowledge of the dangers of = spiritualism. Perhaps the Aksakoff-Solovyoff letters make HPB sound like a = "true believer" because who ever wrote them thought that was HPB's real > perspective. The Solovyoff letters also demonstrate none of the flashes o= f deep insight behind the nature of things that HPB's genuine letters do.=20 > In the Solovyoff published letters HPB is made to remark on her impoveris= hed state or pleas for money or work in a slavish way. In the Feb., '75 Let= ter 18 to Aksakoff she implied she is worried about enough to eat. (p. 73),= while in some genuine letters of the same time within about a month she wr= ites: "...I wonder if I could not have it published in the "Springfield Rep= ublican" by paying for it? I am ready to pay any sum of money for it," (Mar= ch 6, 1975, Letter 24, p. 93); and ".... I will have it printed... and pay = for it anything they like..." (March 7, 1975, Letter 25, p. 95). So at the = same time period the Solovyoff letter shows HPB penniless, while two genuin= e letters show her well-off. > Algeo writes: "HPB's father died on July 27, 1873, but because the family= did not know where she was at the time, she did not hear the news until se= veral months later, after which she also received some money as her share o= f the estate." (pp. 32) Algeo says that in the fall of '74 she received a p= art of her inheritance, but it was likely earlier, as on June 22, 1874 HPB = invested in some farmland on Long Island. (pp. 32) In other words, she had = money. Yet in the Solovyoff-Aksakoff letters of Oct. and Nov., 1874, (nos. = 8, 11) he has her pleading for translation work and impoverished after her = inheritance came through: "Would it not be possible for me to send you.... = translations of articles..." (p. 34); and ".... my means are very small, an= d I am obliged to live by my work, translating and writing in the papers." = (pp. 45). In March, '75 she is paying "any sum" to publish an article of so= meone's. So, it is known she had money before and after this Nov., '74 > letter, but Solovyoff has her falsely impoverished at the time. (However,= by the end of March, '75 she appears to be broke again, as "... $50, scrap= ed off the bottom of an empty purse..." in a genuine letter to Corson [No. = 30].) In Letter 45, May 25, '75, Solovyoff has her boasting of making $6000= in the year so far, and also totally broke, "... my last $200." (p. 172) T= he $6000 seems impossibly high. In Letter 54 to Aksakoff (July 18, '75) Sol= ovyoff has her saying "... I am living from hand to mouth and earning from = $10 to $15 when necessity arises." In a genuine Letter 64 to Corson (Jan. 8= , '76) she says that the New York Sun would pay her for $30 per article for= an article a week. (p. 236)=20 > Letter 17, pp. 70-73: - This Solovyoff-Aksakoff letter seems genuine enou= gh with much of the typical HPB spirit in it. There is a lack of the servil= ity as in the other letters and the attitude toward Olcott is more typical = HPB. Solovyoff didn't necessarily have to alter all of his HPB letters. Wit= hout some of the genuine Blavatsky writing-style, it would have been a poor= book to sell.=20 > While the well-known "boar in the forest" letter is not in this collectio= n, some of Soloyoff's and translator's apparent tampering and obfuscating m= ethods, and the confusion surrounding it all, might be seen in the followin= g quote of HPB's sister from Vania* in Endersby's Hall of Magic Mirrors** (= pp. 59-60): > "Some of the history of Solovioff is in order here. Even [translator] Wal= ter Leaf himself threw doubt on some of his statements at times and one of = the letters he questions is (B) on p. 288 of Solovioff's book.***=20 > "Vera Jelihovsky, H.P.B.'s sister, published the following, reproduced by= Vania: 'The chief point of this translation (into French; see Solovioff 31= 6-20) I was told (I may observe that I cannot guarantee the exact truth of = this statement, for I repeat that no one would ever show me the letter in F= rench) lay in the fact that in it Madame Blavatsky denied the Mahatmas, and= admitted that she had invented their existence.... But as the readers know= , in the Russian letter there is nothing of the sort. How did it get into t= he translation?" In pursuing this, she saw Solovioff and asked for the tran= slation. He said that he had neither the original nor a copy; it was in the= hands of a Madame M. in Paris. He also refused to give her a copy of the R= ussian, but would not explain. She then went to Baissac, the translator, wh= o also did not have a copy of the translation, but said positively that the= re was no such confession in it. (This is the famous "Boar in the Forest" l= etter which > is in the Corson collection; Symonds asked Baissac to get her a copy of t= he French translation from Mme. M. Three weeks later he wrote her that Mme.= M. didn't have a copy either. The mystery of this translation is bogged do= wn in Paris to this day. But it is only a sample of Solovioff - though oddl= y, Kingsland quotes a passage from him which seems extremely critical of Ho= dgson himself. (Mme. M. was Madame Morsier. After her Lodge was destroyed b= y this translation, Solovioff got it back and hung on to it.) > -------------- > * VANIA, K.F. - Madame H.P. Blavatsky, Sat. Pub. Co., Bombay, 1951 > ** Endersby, V.A., The Hall of Magic Mirrors, Carlton Press, N.Y., N.Y., = 1969 > *** SOLOVYOFF, V.S. - A Modern Priestess of Isis (1895). > ------------------ > Letter 19, p. 74: - This might indicate some of the intrigue and general = aura behind some of these letters, as Algeo remarks that this partial lette= r, found in the Philosophic Research Society archives, was from and apparen= tly ripped out of an Adyar scrapbook. > Letters nos. 108, 115, 116, 117a, 118, and 125, pp 399-464s: - How comple= tely unreliable some "translations" or transcriptions may be is brought out= by Algeo on pp. 401, (and worth reading the section in whole) on Eleanor S= idgwick's copies of HPB letters to H. Chintamon, Letters nos. 108, 115, 116= , 117a, 118, and 125: "... The copies were probably made by Eleanor Sidgwic= k, who freely abbreviated and paraphased the material and interjected perso= nal opinions about it. She rephrased passages and described what she saw in= the letters, often writing about HPB, rather than recording HPB's actual w= ords...." It was like she was made to do something in spite of hatred for H= PB, and thus actually refusing to do it by doing it in the worse and most i= nsinuating way, it not being valuable enough in her conventional christian = mind to actually transcribe. She even skipped whole pages of philosophy (".= .. a page and a half about pantheism etc..." - p. 428, No. 115) which she p= robably > found booring. 'And this under the aegis of an organization posing on its= supposed scientific exact methods, the SPR or British Society for Psychica= l Research! (Solovyoff likely suffered a similar transcription disease, on = personal animosity basis.)=20 > One "quote" seems particularly Sidgwick commentary falsely posing as HPB'= s thought: ".... Edison a Theosophist - description of phonograph - (graphi= c and clear) - .... phonographs might as easily as not be placed in the sta= tues of the caves of Ellora and Elephanta and the gods made to speak to the= multitudes for hours - truth and to convert them to pure atheism by the th= ousands." Rather stupid, and HPB didn't believe in conventional atheism, as= it is equivalent to materialism. > Two versions of supposedly the same short (in transcription) Letter 117 a= re given, one from Sidgwick, one from "Sarda" published in a book. They hav= e almost no similarity other than mentioning the shipping of 250 books, so = one really wonders what is really going on here. Are they different letters= , or are each trimmed down so extensively that they nearly don't overlap in= subject. Algeo remarks that it "... raises the question of how much has be= en ommitted from other letters..." (p. 433) > The "proposed letters" to Massey and Kislingbury within Letter 118, pp. 4= 36-7, seems incredibly pompous to be HPB's and may be more Sidgwick's imagi= native rendition and additions than anything. (The Sidgwick copy was made a= fter SPR's "Hodgson Case" and she probably viewed HPB as some sort of scamm= er.) > There are 8 Letters included written to Chintaman. No. 120 there is an or= iginal for, and No. 112 was included in the "Hodgson Report." Both of these= seem genuine and in the Blavatsky style, while all of the other 6 letters = from Sidgwick are corrupted and unreliable, varying from probably genuine B= lavatsky to the Sidgwick-biped writing and imagination. > ---------------- > That HPB had enemies and thus those motivated to alter or write phoney le= tters is probably contested by few. Persons writing anonymous threatening l= etters certainly have the motivation if not necessarily the skill. HPB writ= es, "I have received anonymous letters, threatening messages and insulting = warnings but only feel as laughing at them." (p. 102) Elswhere, in Letter 6= 7 to Mrs. Corson, she writes: "Here now is the great moment! Mme Blavatsky = although the daughter of her forefathers is an immoral woman, a woman who h= as had loads of lovers. While Dr Bloede secretly spreads the tale in Brookl= yn that I have had a criminal liaison with the Pope and Bismarck, Mr Home, = that untrained medium, pours his venom over me in Europe. More than that, I= , who have worked 18 hours a day since last summer, I am accused in anonymo= us letters sent to my women friends, who bring them to me indignantly (like= Emma Har: Brittain for example) of frequenting houses of assignation. They > offer to lead Emma H.B. to these spots and to give her proofs that I was = there the very same day and hour that she spent an entire day with me!" (pp= . 252-3) > The Solovyoff-Aksakoff letters are also not entire letters, but partial l= etters and excerpts made by Solovyoff. Of course meaning and context can be= altered this way to the editors pleasure by eliminating important or expla= natory remarks. (But who would need to do this who also would alter the let= ters themselves!)=20 > In a genuine letter to Aksakoff, or which there is an original (Letter 12= 7, pp. 468-9), there's none of the slavish spirit, and although she makes f= un of her self ("... my manners of a Prussian grenadier on furlough leave..= .."), there isn't any false lamenting of a supposedly "immoral" past.=20 > -------------- > For effect, below is a compilation of self-incriminating and slavish type= excerpts from the Blavatsky-to-Aksakoff letters transcribed by Solovyoff i= n Volume I of TPH's Blavatsky Letters. Ask oneself if this sounds like the = real Blavatsky found in letters known to be genuine, or if this is Solovyof= f forging and mis-transcribing Blavatsky letters, and if they should be inc= luded alongside in a Volume of genuine Letters: - > No. 11, pp. 44-46: - "'... her (HPB's) morals, which have not been very s= trict.' Whoever it was who told you about me, they told you, the truth.... = the deep sorrow which I long have known for the irrevocable past.... Morali= ty and virtue I regarded as a social garment, for the sake of propriety....= I see that there is no salvation for me but death.... Do not reveal to him= that which, if he knew it and were convinced, would force me to escape to = the ends of the Earth...." >=20 > No. 12, pp. 47-50: - ".... to depise me for my sad reputation in the past= ... If I have any hope for the future, it is only beyond the grave, when br= ight spirits shall help me to free myself from my sinful and impure envelop= e.... my accursed name of Blavatsky. I do not dare to risk signing my name = to any book. It might raise reminiscences too dangerous for me..... These a= re the bitter fruits of my youth devoted to Satan, his pomps and works!....= =20 > No. 17, pp. 71-72: - "... the Blavatsky of many sins... In the Lord do we= put our trust, nor shall we be shamed forever.... my aunts and sister.... = I am no credit to them... Here I am at least a human being; while there, I = am - Blavatsky...." > No. 33, p. 126: - "... there is only one thing I am seeking and strugglin= g for - that people should forget the former Blavatsky...." > No. 55, p. 195: - "Oh, if only no one knew me in St. Petersburg!"=20 > No. 69, p. 260: - ".... I really cannot, just because the devil got me in= to trouble in my youth, go and rip up my stomach now like a Japanese suicid= e... My position is cheerless - simply helpless. There is nothing left but = to start for Australia and change my name forever."=20 >=20 > No. 94, p. 361: - "... because of my shame and sorrow, I am going where n= o one knows me... Home's malignity has ruined me forever in Europe." > ---------------- > Fohat editor MacDonald writes on dubious letters and forged excerpts ascr= ibed to Blavatsky: "Students who have read volumes of Blavatsky's works wit= h an earnest desire to understand, begin to be able to identify the rhythm = of her work and whereas they may not take much notice of the rhythm when it= is there, they certainly notice when it is not. [I would go further to say= that words have their own energy and are reflective of the person doing th= e writing, the problem with the letters in question is that they do in fact= give off a bad 'vibe.'" (10-24-04 email, "Theosophy Canada" website.)=20 > He also suggests that a possible improper motive for publishing phoney Bl= avatsky letters, may be that it will chase the superficial people away - or= the "swine", and the deeper student will see through the phoniness to the = "pearls" of the genuine material! - which I don't believe holds water eithe= r. Lucifer7 editor Katinka Hesselink wrote: "In reading the book it wasn't = clear to me that these letters were probably fabrications. If it isn't auto= matically clear to me, the same goes for other readers, I'm sure." (Oct. 30= , '04, ibid.) One has to read a large volume of Blavatsky material to get t= he persona and style and know what doesn't fit in or "ring true."=20 > Universal opinion among the critics is that the Letters are not delineate= d clearly enough as to which letters are suspect and which are not, but jus= t published alongside each other willy-nilly, with occasional comment as th= o their suspect authenticity. A separate appendix for suspect letters is of= ten mentioned, if they were to be published at all. The "dead fish" attitud= e of academics with no discrimination or intuition is castigated often in o= ne form or another, the "letter" of the work instead of a genuine or ingenu= ine underlying "spirit" of it. > --------------------------- > Letter 88, pp. 314-328: - HPB writes to her aunt about her "foolish" youn= ger life and mentions the "devil" philosophically as an opposing principle,= and this may be of similar nature to her comments to Aksakoff about her yo= unger life, which Solovyoff mis-transcribed and altered for his own purpose= s. I think she is referring almost exclusively about the eternal pain in th= e posterior she caused for her family in her constant rebellion and indepen= dent nature while a child and adolescent. She writes: ".... The Devil, or r= ather the idea of an opposing power, is the lever of Archimedes on which th= e world turns. It is a field where grows the good, for wherever the manure = is the richest, the grain grows best. Had I not been the devil knows what, = to my shame and sorrow (one cannot relive one's past, one can only try to e= rase it according to one's strength), if I had not been foolish in my young= er days, I would not have been able, as I have done, to place seven people = on the > true path." (p. 326) She again refers to herself as a young social embara= ssment in Letter 92 to her aunt: "....If I had been born a Buddhist and not= a Christian, I would not have shamed the heads of those whom I loved more = than all else in the world, grandmother and aunt and yourself and the whole= family." (p. 346) Marrying Nikifor Blavatsky in 1849 at 17 or 18 and then = running away from him, is probably the chief thought, which most Theosophis= ts probably find admirable instead.=20 > Letter 92, pp. 342-59: - For a good example of how much differing version= s and excerpts of a letter can differ for which an original is available, s= ee the Original and the two other published versions of this letter. > ------------------ > NO ULTIMATE PROOFS > How can there be a final proof to the genuiness of a letter is some one i= s able to perfectly mimic someone else's handwriting? There cannot be. Yet = this is the case as proved in later years to Mme. Blavatsky when Indian Jud= ge Khandalavala showed her a perfect copy of her own handwriting which he h= ad made. (The Judge Case, Ernest E. Pelletier, Edmonton T.S., 2004, Part I,= pp. 379-381) This has to be likened to an occult ability, more than just a= physical skill. HPB wrote in a letter to Sinnett about a letter she had re= ceived from Khandalavala (Dec. 29, '85): > "I send you a funny thing. Read the 3rd, 4th, & 5th & 6th lines. This is = undeniably my handwriting. Kandhalavala copied it from my letter to him. Wh= en I received and saw it I was positively startled. Let me write it 'staunc= h fearless friends whose devotion to the Master and yourself has not wavere= d one hair's breath' - I wrote it without looking at it, so as not to be im= peded by the desire of copying it. Now I ask you, were such a letter a whol= e letter written in the same handwriting as these two 1/2 lines wouldn't [y= ou] swear it was my handwriting? Please put it carefully away and keep it. = Why Khandalaval should have coped that sentence in my handwiting I do not k= now. Once he had written three letters copied from my own and brought them = to me and I swore to them myself, not knowing what he meant... I tell you t= hese lines are in my handwriting and I, the first, would swear to them in a= ny Court." (Letters of Blavatsky to Sinnett, TUP, No. LXIII, p. 158) > K.H. remarks on his and Blavatsky's handwriting being forged in the Mahat= ma Letters. (TUP, p. 431) M.'s handwriting was forged in ".... five or six = other letters in his handwriting emanating from the Dugpa who has charge of= Fern." (ibid., p. 294) K.H. remarks on the difference between a "clumsy" f= orger and an occult or clever one: ".... Mr. Massey, I see, makes no differ= ence between an 'occult' and a common forger such as his legal experience m= ay have made him acquainted with. An 'occult' forger a dugpa would have for= ged the letter precisely in this tone. He would have never become guilty of= being carried away by his personal grudge, so as to deprive his letter of = its cleverest feature. The T.S. would not be shown by him 'a superstructure= upon fraud,' and it is 'the very opposite impression' that is its crown. I= say is for half of the letter is a forgery and a very occult one." (ibid.,= 419) > So it is nearly impossible to get any final proof on the genuiness of a d= ifficult letter, even the proper attitude can be faked, let alone the handw= riting itself, although most cases aren't this worse scenario. Ultimately o= ne may have only personal discrimination, and that is subjective. > -------------- > Letter 33, pp. 126-27: - Solovyoff again has HPB apparently lamenting her= horrible moral past. The only "vices" that she ever directly refers to els= ewhere are the victorian ones of smoking and swearing (in Russian!). (Lette= r 30 to Corson) > Letter 61, pp. 214-15: - This Solovyoff-Aksakoff letter has HPB say that = ".... the rules of the Society [T.S.] are so strict that it is impossible f= or a man who has been associated in any disreputable matter to become a mem= ber." Yet, Solovyoff has her claiming disreputability herself in previous l= etters.=20 > Letter 76, p. 288: - Solovyoff has Blavatsky being present on the killing= of a cat in an occult experiement. This seems unlikely, as Blavatsky's tea= chers didn't believe even in unnecessarily killing a mosquito. (reference i= n a Mahatma Letter)=20 > ------------------ > TRAIN TRIP TO NEVADA > Letter 121, pp. 443-51: - (A "probably date" of July 3, 1878) HPB tells N= . de Fadyev of a trip to Nevada and also mentions "Milwaukee."=20 > In his commentary Dr. Algeo remarks that: "The episode has a fictional ai= r about it. It is not improbably that HPB, who was known for the stories sh= e told her relatives and companions in their childhood, is still making up = a good yarn for them." On p. 416 Algeo also refers to this trip and says ".= ... which the evidence also suggests did not occur", in spite of HPB descri= bing it.=20 > The complaint may be that there is not enough time for this trip as de Zi= rkoff's schedule for HPB that month doesn't allow enough time, or that the = dates aren't consistent with it. Considering (from the "Wikipedia" online e= ncyclopedia entry pasted below) one could get to Nevada, at least, and back= in less than a week via the "Transcontinental Express," - a quick trip to = Nevada would have been easily accomplished, with few taking note of it. Mil= waukee would have to have been a short side-jaunt north from Chicago from t= he Trans-continental route. Also, this letter (#121) also has a "page in th= e orignal letter missing", so could be parts of two different letters, leav= ing much more uncertainty as to just what times are what.=20 > Zirkoff's chronology (p. 451) would allow up to 12 days for this trip - p= lenty of time, although the various dates and HPB's "3 days ago" do not syn= ch - unless the letter is mis-dated, or considering the "missing page/s" th= is letter was written in two or more installments, as people sometimes do i= n relating events to family. The missing page/s may have had more informati= on. On June 4th, HPB (and Olcott?) were with Belle Mitchell in New Jersey, = and again on June 16th HPB was with Mitchell. Olcott, in Albany on this dat= e, could have taken a connection on the railway journey back. Also, when on= e is going on a trip, it is common practice to stay with someone near the s= tation to get a ride to the station, with the same person picking them up o= n the return journey, Belle Mitchell in this case. (Hoboken, New Jersey is = just outside New York City.)=20 > "Between 1865 and 1869 the Union Pacific laid 1,086 miles and the Central= Pacific 689 miles of track. The years immediately following the constructi= on of the railway were years of astounding growth for the United States, la= rgely due to the speed and ease of travel this railroad provided. For examp= le, on June 4,1876 an express train called the Transcontinental Express arr= ived in San Francisco, California via the First Transcontinental Railroad o= nly 83 hours and 39 minutes after it left from New York City Only 10 years = before the same journey would have taken months overland and weeks on ship.= " ( ) > Letter 121 also carries the fantastical account of Krishnavarma, who is n= ot mentioned elsewhere in the literature (There are 2 different Krishnavarm= as), $20,000 in gold from him for the Society, a business venture in the We= st, and some events along the way. Algeo writes: "The episode has a fiction= al air about it. It is not improbably that HPB, who was known for the stori= es she told her relatives and companions in their childhood, is still makin= g up a good yarn for them." After all, though, we are dealing with Mme. Bla= vatsky, who's whole life was fantastical, and it is hardly fair to equate t= his with for making up stories in childhood for her friends entertainment, = who knew they were made up.=20 > If Olcott did not report this trip and Krishnavarma in his "Old Diary Lea= ves - 6 Vols., (there were TWO Krishnavarma's - the other one connected wit= h the Arya Samaj) it may have been because the money involved and the trip = to get it was an uncomfortable area, and also Krishnavarma's servant threw = one guy in a ditch and hit another guy while being harrassed - which would = also be an uncomfortable subject for Olcott, and maybe have legal implicati= ons. > Algeo is referring in the quote to accounts of HPB's childhood by her aun= t Mme Nadejda Fadeef, and sister Vera Jelihovsky. Fadeef refers to her "exu= berance of imagination and wonderful sensitiveness.... she would spend hour= s and days quietly whispering, as people thought, to herself, and narrating= , with no one hear her, in some dark corner, marvellous tales of travels in= bright stars and other worlds...." Helena used to wander the cellar cataco= mbs of her grandfather's estate and have hiding places to escape lessons. "= Once or twice she could hardly be found in those damp subterranean corridor= s, having in her endeavours to escape detection lost her way in the labyrin= th. For all this, she was not in the least daunted or repentant, for, as sh= e assured us, she was never there alone, but in the company of her little '= hunch-backs' and playmates." In the children's hide-away beyond a ruined ga= rden and in the virgin forest, "For hours at a time she used to narrate to = us > younger children, and even to her seniors in years, the most incredible s= tories with the cool assurance and conviction of an eye witness, and one wh= o knew what she was talking about." ( Personal Memoirs of H.P. Blavatsky, c= ompiled by Mary K. Neff, E.P. Dutton, N.Y., 1937, pp. 23-31. Neff says the = stories were maybe clairvoyance and not fancy.) > The "20,000 in gold" wasn't the only case of HPB handling large amounts o= f money for her work. Olcott, in "Old Diary Leaves" * (Vol. I, pp. 440-41),= relates Mme. Blavatsky having a suitcase of money (23,000 francs) of the A= depts', and told to deliver it to an unknown man at a certain address, who = happened to be sitting at a table writing his own suicide note, with a revo= lver at his side. (He had been swindled previously of the sum of money, and= needed for some Adept purposes.)=20 > The account reads: "... When H.P.B. was ordered from Paris to New York in= 1873, she soon found herself in the most dismal want, having, as stated in= a previous chapter, to boil her coffee-dregs over and over again for lack = of pence for buying a fresh supply; and to keep off starvation, at last had= to work with her needle for a maker of cravats. She got no presents from u= nexpected sources, found no fairy-gold on her mattress on waking in the mor= ning. The time ws not yet. But, although she was in such stark poverty hers= elf, she had lying in her trunk for some time after her arrival a large sum= of money (I think something like 23,000 francs) which had been confided to= her by the Master, to await orders. The order finally came to her to go to= Buffalo. Where that was or how to reach it, she had not the remotest idea = until she enquired: What to do at Buffalo? 'No matter what: take the money = with you.' On reaching her destination whe was told to take a hack and driv= e > to such an address, and give the money to such and such a person; to make= no explanations, but to take his receipt and come away. She did so: the ma= n was found at the address given, and found in peculiar conditions. He was = writing a farewell letter to his family, with a loaded pistol on the table = with which he would have shot himself in another half hour if H.P.B. had no= t come. It seems - as she told me subsequently - that this was a most worth= y man who had been robbed of the 23,000 francs in some peculiar way that ma= de it necessary, for the sake of events that would subsequently happen as a= consequence - events of importance to the world - that he should have the = money restored to him at a particular crisis, and H.P.B. was the agent depu= ted to this act of beneficence. When we met she had entirely forgotten the = man's name, his street and number. Here we have a casse where the very agen= t chosen to carry the money to the beneficiary was herself in most necessit= ous > circumstances, yet not permitted to use one franc of the trust fund to bu= y herself a pound of fresh coffee." (Old Diary Leaves, Vol. I, pp. 440-41) > ------------- > A question might be also is if HPB wrote all her own letters. Officers fo= r organizations if overwhelmed with correspondence sometimes as accepted pr= actice have assistants answer letters under the officer's name. I think som= ewhere Mead remarks that HPB had people answer her letters sometimes. >=20 >=20 > ------------------------- >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. >=20 > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > Yahoo! Groups Links >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra. > Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite > http://mail.terra.com.br/protected_email/imail/imail.cgi?+_u=3Dcarlosavel= ine&_l=3D1,1151942274.741763.20219.almora.hst.terra.com.br,41961,2003112711= 4101,20031127114101 >=20 > Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra. > Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 30/06/2006 / Vers?o: 4.4.00= /4797 > Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From carlosaveline@terra.com.br Mon Jul 03 12:36:07 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: carlosaveline@terra.com.br X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 21775 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2006 19:20:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.67.35) by m23.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Jul 2006 19:20:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO bundure.hst.terra.com.br) (200.176.10.195) by mta9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Jul 2006 19:20:21 -0000 Received: from camenana.hst.terra.com.br (camenana.hst.terra.com.br [200.176.10.12]) by bundure.hst.terra.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2104B9A0228 for ; Mon, 3 Jul 2006 16:20:10 -0300 (BRT) X-Terra-Karma: 0% X-Terra-Hash: b8867c75a4abfaaf1429a383d3d39eb8 Received-SPF: pass (camenana.hst.terra.com.br: domain of terra.com.br designates 200.176.10.12 as permitted sender) client-ip=200.176.10.12; envelope-from=carlosaveline@terra.com.br; helo=terra.com.br; Received: from terra.com.br (bengazi.hst.terra.com.br [200.176.3.176]) (authenticated user carlosaveline) by camenana.hst.terra.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id 012434E00CA for ; Mon, 3 Jul 2006 16:20:09 -0300 (BRT) Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 16:20:09 -0300 Message-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Sensitivity: 3 To: "theos-talk" X-XaM3-API-Version: 4.1 (B115) X-SenderIP: 201.15.76.9 X-Originating-IP: 200.176.10.195 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 From: "carlosaveline" Subject: Re: On HPB Letters X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=264889858; y=FAMTqZG9punPYq6aLLVAwoOHP1AiDQDBtW0qpKsfIjjt6OoOQkFPOtw X-Yahoo-Profile: cardosoaveline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 34271 Dear Mark. Thank you very much for your important contribution below.=20=20 I will read it carefully and then comment it.=20 Regards, Carlos Cardoso Aveline=20=20 De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com C=F3pia: Data:Mon, 3 Jul 2006 08:56:43 -0700 (PDT) Assunto:[Spam] Theos-World Critical Notes on HPB Letters > I compiled some notes and remarks of others on the Letters of HPB, vol. 1= , which might be of interest to readers still trying to sort the jumble out= : > - jake jaqua > SOME CRITICAL NOTES ON LETTERS OF H.P. BLAVATSKY, VOL. I > p. xv. - "... John [Cooper] died before completing the project of even hi= s doctorate, which was awarded posthumously." This could be interpreted as = an unnecessary slight at Cooper (not even a Doctor!), and his implied infer= ior status as an editor. But the post-humous degree is worth mentioning for= the record. Cooper's doctoral project was the Blavatsky Letters project, a= t the University of Sydney, with which he was almost finished with Volume I= at his death from a heart-attack at 67 yrs. His Master's thesis was also a= Theosophical topic. Just before his death "John stated that the first volu= me (of an anticipated three volume collection) was nearly ready for Quest/T= PH-Wheaton to publish." (Theosophical History, Vol. VII, No. 4, Oct. 1998, = pp. 135-6, quoting Fohat, Vol II, No. 2, Summer, 1998, pp. 44-45. ) In refe= rence to the Letters, he posted on Nov. 3, 1997 on the Theos-World web site= : "My major news is that the first volume of The Collected Letters of H.P. > Blavatsky is almost completed. Wheaton will be sending me back shortly th= e second proof of the text of the letters and their annotations... The c. 3= 50 letters range from 1862 to 1882, with about 100 letters that are new to = the theosophical world...." (Ibid., Eklund, p. 142) There are 136 letters i= n the present Volume, including to January, 1879. > Algeo remarks that he could not use Cooper's work "directly." John P. Dev= eney did a review of the Letters in Theosophical History (Vol. XI, No. 3) a= nd writes: "The editor [John Algeo] in his preface acknowledges the Hercule= an labors of the late John Cooper in adding to the corpus of letters and in= preparing them for publication, but states that, for unspecified reasons, = none of Cooper's work could be used 'directly,' and that even his transcrip= tions of texts were not used because they were 'not accurate.' This is a su= rprising charge, directed as it is toward a person known for his meticulous= work and now unavailable to defend himself...." Fohat editor R. Bruce MacD= onald explains: "To put it less diplomatically, this excuse by John Algeo i= s pure politics and to the average member of the Theosophical Society, inco= mprehensible." (Vol. VIII, No. 3) > Daniel Caldwell has argued that Cooper also intended to include the Solov= yoff/Aksakoff letters in his versions, and thus Cooper's version of the Let= ters may have been equally controversial. (email of Oct. 24, 04 to Wheeler = on "Theosophy Canada" website. ) > Dara Eklund says that Boris de Zirkoff intended to include them in his pl= anned publication also ("The Logic of Debate," "Theosophy Canada" website),= but how and with what commentary is only hearsay. MacDonald remarks that i= f Cooper and de Zirkoff intended to print the phoney letters in the same ma= nner, then they were wrong also. He also writes: "The way these letters wer= e presented makes them at the very least a type of innuendo. In as much as = they are putting word's into Blavatsky's mouth, they are much worse than in= nuendo." Forging is a worse crime than false gossip, bad enough itself. > Does a doctorate mean anything whatsoever to understanding Blavatsky? It = only greases the wheels of conventionality of being "in the academy," gives= some editorial skill, and opens purse-strings. Otherwise it is a hindrance= . Purucker made the statement somewhere to Helen Todd that one of a Theosop= hist's greatest difficulties was unlearning what they had learned in conven= tional sciences. Blavatsky - who all this 125 years of controversy is about= - had no degrees whatsoever. > On the title page the book is edited by John Algeo and assisted by his wi= fe Adele S. Algeo. The "editorial committee" is given as Daniel H. Caldwell= , Dara Eklund, Robert Ellwood, Joy Mills, and Nicholas Weeks. John Cooper i= s not given a credit on the title page. Of the limited comments I've seen f= rom members of the "Editorial Committe," the impression I have is that basi= cally 99% of the work was done by Algeo and his wife, and the committe was = used mostly for passive "rubber stamping" whatever he wanted to do. Perhaps= some of them were just over-awed by being a member of the committee and lo= st their discrimination. Three of the members I have some familiarity with,= and thought before of them as staunch Blavatsky defenders, who would not h= ave approved the publishing of the many false and altered letters that were= published in this Volume on equal footing with the genuine correspondence.= Criticism aside, one must say also that there is a good deal of admirable > scholarship in the book, supporting information and notes, and the book i= s well-organized.=20 > ------------ > Letter 7, pp. 23-31 - This is a stupid, slavish, and money-seeking letter= quite unlike Blavatsky. On p. 31 Algeo gives the source in the Russian arc= hives of the supposed original but was unsuccessful in getting a copy. If t= he original really exists, it still seems a phoney letter. Comparison of ha= nd-writing would be useful, but even that can be forged in the extreme case= . Since this and some of the following letters have a similar tone and styl= e to them, maybe someone in this time period was writing letters in Blavats= ky's name for unknown reason, perhaps a knowledgable enemy of her or her fa= mily, as written when she was in Russia. > Letter 8, pp. 33-35. - The tone of this letter is stupid and slavish, muc= h like Letter 7, two things Blavatsky was not. Unless it be attributed to y= outh, she was 42 at the time. It might be compared with the quality and sty= le of her article published at the same time, "Marvellous Spirit Manifestat= ions." (CW: 1:30-4) No original available, but based on her enemy Soloyoff'= s publication. In it she claims to have finished Dicken's unfinished novel = "Edwin Drood," which would have been significant. If true, she surely would= have at least made a comment on it later in life, which wasn't remarked up= on later in any of the mass of biographical material or letters (other than= the doubtful Letter 8.) Algeo doesn't remark here or in other letters that= it is another thought to be phoney, but just that "she wrote the following= letter.... to Aksakoff."=20 > Letter 11, pp. 44-46 - This is another Solovyoff phoney alteration or com= position by someone, with the same un-Blavatsky-like style and stupidity, a= s appears in all the other Solovyoff letters. When Solovyoff published them= , why didn't Prof. Aksakoff protest about them if they were phoney? Most of= ten people do nothing, unfortunately, is one explanation. Perhaps he had tu= rned into an enemy, too, or any of other possible reasons. Maybe he was bro= ke, and got a pay-off. These Solovyoff letters are the only ones in which s= he repeatedly laments about her supposed horrible immoral past. Why doesn't= she ever refer to this in similar terms in any of her letters that are kno= wn to be genuine? She always demonstrated the opposite attitude - being pro= ud of succeeding to run away from her older husband, Blavatsky, instead of = considering it "immoral" as implied here. Compare what she is made to say i= n this letter about spiritualist Andrew Jackson Davis: "..... who feels and > reads men more clearly than any book (and this no one doubts who knows hi= m)....", with what she says about him in a genuine letter with the original= : "... Jack Davis and Judge Edmonds are but school boys just trying to spel= l their A.B.C...." (Letter 21, p. 87) > In this Letter 11, Solovyoff has HPB writing: "......"I have heard of Mad= ame Blavatsky from one of her parents, who spoke of her as a rather strong = medium. Unfortunately, her communications reflect her morals, which have no= t been very strict." Whoever it was who told you about me, they told you, t= he truth, in essence, if not in detail. (p. 44) R. Bruce MacDonald writes o= n this: "..... the only parent that Aksakoff could be referring to is Blava= tsky's father who had already been dead over a year at this time. Blavatsky= 's mother died while she was a child and referring to a child as a medium w= ith lax morals makes no sense. If it was clearly her father, why didn't she= say, "What my father told you was true", rather than the awkward phrase sh= e used? Why also would a European family of nobility be going about telling= complete strangers about a family member's lax morality and her practice o= f mediumship? This does not seem credible, especially coming from the fathe= r. Also, > who would write to another person 'her communications reflect her morals'= ? What does that even mean?" (Fohat Supplement, Fall, 2004) Does it seem ge= nuine for Aksakoff to start right out in his first letter to HPB by insulti= ng her?=20 >=20 > Letter 12, pp. 46-52 - Written in the same phoney Soloyoff style, with no= ne of the "sparkle" and true wit of HPB's genuine letters. 'Again slavish a= nd self-effacing about her supposed immoral past, not found in any of her g= enuine letters. Most of the Solovyoff published letters do not show the typ= ical Blvatsky style. She refers to Olcott several places with deferment and= admiration of his book, respectability and work with spiritualism - someth= ing else almost entirely uncharacteristic of Blavatsky, as she almost alway= s sprinkled references to Olcott with chatisement of his various "flapdoodl= es", and never of him as her superior.=20 > The criticism of the Solovyoff-Aksadoff transcriptions as forgery and mis= -transcription has all been placed on Solovyoff's head, and justly so as hi= s other transcriptions are just as bad. Since there's no evidence of Aksako= ff coming to HPB's defense, it is also possible that Solovyoff got only cop= ies from Aksakoff and Aksakoff corrupted his own copies as well.=20 > Letter 13, pp. 52-57: - This letter to her family does sound like Blavats= ky, although it was written in the same time period as the false-sounding o= nes published by Solovyoff. HPB re-wrote and edited this letter herself for= Sinnett for his Incidents in the Life of Madame Blavatsky. (p. 55) Most li= kely they sound like two different people writing the letters, because they= were two different people, because the writer (or editor and re-writer) of= the Solovyoff published letters was Solovyoff himself! (Perhaps with even = some help from Aksakoff, after HPB turned against spiritualism.) Algeo rema= rks in his introduction that Blavatsky wrote Aksakoff as a "true believer" = in Spiritualism, which was just a pose for Aksakoff's benefit. This letter = 13 to her family is certainly full of her real knowledge of the dangers of = spiritualism. Perhaps the Aksakoff-Solovyoff letters make HPB sound like a = "true believer" because who ever wrote them thought that was HPB's real > perspective. The Solovyoff letters also demonstrate none of the flashes o= f deep insight behind the nature of things that HPB's genuine letters do.=20 > In the Solovyoff published letters HPB is made to remark on her impoveris= hed state or pleas for money or work in a slavish way. In the Feb., '75 Let= ter 18 to Aksakoff she implied she is worried about enough to eat. (p. 73),= while in some genuine letters of the same time within about a month she wr= ites: "...I wonder if I could not have it published in the "Springfield Rep= ublican" by paying for it? I am ready to pay any sum of money for it," (Mar= ch 6, 1975, Letter 24, p. 93); and ".... I will have it printed... and pay = for it anything they like..." (March 7, 1975, Letter 25, p. 95). So at the = same time period the Solovyoff letter shows HPB penniless, while two genuin= e letters show her well-off. > Algeo writes: "HPB's father died on July 27, 1873, but because the family= did not know where she was at the time, she did not hear the news until se= veral months later, after which she also received some money as her share o= f the estate." (pp. 32) Algeo says that in the fall of '74 she received a p= art of her inheritance, but it was likely earlier, as on June 22, 1874 HPB = invested in some farmland on Long Island. (pp. 32) In other words, she had = money. Yet in the Solovyoff-Aksakoff letters of Oct. and Nov., 1874, (nos. = 8, 11) he has her pleading for translation work and impoverished after her = inheritance came through: "Would it not be possible for me to send you.... = translations of articles..." (p. 34); and ".... my means are very small, an= d I am obliged to live by my work, translating and writing in the papers." = (pp. 45). In March, '75 she is paying "any sum" to publish an article of so= meone's. So, it is known she had money before and after this Nov., '74 > letter, but Solovyoff has her falsely impoverished at the time. (However,= by the end of March, '75 she appears to be broke again, as "... $50, scrap= ed off the bottom of an empty purse..." in a genuine letter to Corson [No. = 30].) In Letter 45, May 25, '75, Solovyoff has her boasting of making $6000= in the year so far, and also totally broke, "... my last $200." (p. 172) T= he $6000 seems impossibly high. In Letter 54 to Aksakoff (July 18, '75) Sol= ovyoff has her saying "... I am living from hand to mouth and earning from = $10 to $15 when necessity arises." In a genuine Letter 64 to Corson (Jan. 8= , '76) she says that the New York Sun would pay her for $30 per article for= an article a week. (p. 236)=20 > Letter 17, pp. 70-73: - This Solovyoff-Aksakoff letter seems genuine enou= gh with much of the typical HPB spirit in it. There is a lack of the servil= ity as in the other letters and the attitude toward Olcott is more typical = HPB. Solovyoff didn't necessarily have to alter all of his HPB letters. Wit= hout some of the genuine Blavatsky writing-style, it would have been a poor= book to sell.=20 > While the well-known "boar in the forest" letter is not in this collectio= n, some of Soloyoff's and translator's apparent tampering and obfuscating m= ethods, and the confusion surrounding it all, might be seen in the followin= g quote of HPB's sister from Vania* in Endersby's Hall of Magic Mirrors** (= pp. 59-60): > "Some of the history of Solovioff is in order here. Even [translator] Wal= ter Leaf himself threw doubt on some of his statements at times and one of = the letters he questions is (B) on p. 288 of Solovioff's book.***=20 > "Vera Jelihovsky, H.P.B.'s sister, published the following, reproduced by= Vania: 'The chief point of this translation (into French; see Solovioff 31= 6-20) I was told (I may observe that I cannot guarantee the exact truth of = this statement, for I repeat that no one would ever show me the letter in F= rench) lay in the fact that in it Madame Blavatsky denied the Mahatmas, and= admitted that she had invented their existence.... But as the readers know= , in the Russian letter there is nothing of the sort. How did it get into t= he translation?" In pursuing this, she saw Solovioff and asked for the tran= slation. He said that he had neither the original nor a copy; it was in the= hands of a Madame M. in Paris. He also refused to give her a copy of the R= ussian, but would not explain. She then went to Baissac, the translator, wh= o also did not have a copy of the translation, but said positively that the= re was no such confession in it. (This is the famous "Boar in the Forest" l= etter which > is in the Corson collection; Symonds asked Baissac to get her a copy of t= he French translation from Mme. M. Three weeks later he wrote her that Mme.= M. didn't have a copy either. The mystery of this translation is bogged do= wn in Paris to this day. But it is only a sample of Solovioff - though oddl= y, Kingsland quotes a passage from him which seems extremely critical of Ho= dgson himself. (Mme. M. was Madame Morsier. After her Lodge was destroyed b= y this translation, Solovioff got it back and hung on to it.) > -------------- > * VANIA, K.F. - Madame H.P. Blavatsky, Sat. Pub. Co., Bombay, 1951 > ** Endersby, V.A., The Hall of Magic Mirrors, Carlton Press, N.Y., N.Y., = 1969 > *** SOLOVYOFF, V.S. - A Modern Priestess of Isis (1895). > ------------------ > Letter 19, p. 74: - This might indicate some of the intrigue and general = aura behind some of these letters, as Algeo remarks that this partial lette= r, found in the Philosophic Research Society archives, was from and apparen= tly ripped out of an Adyar scrapbook. > Letters nos. 108, 115, 116, 117a, 118, and 125, pp 399-464s: - How comple= tely unreliable some "translations" or transcriptions may be is brought out= by Algeo on pp. 401, (and worth reading the section in whole) on Eleanor S= idgwick's copies of HPB letters to H. Chintamon, Letters nos. 108, 115, 116= , 117a, 118, and 125: "... The copies were probably made by Eleanor Sidgwic= k, who freely abbreviated and paraphased the material and interjected perso= nal opinions about it. She rephrased passages and described what she saw in= the letters, often writing about HPB, rather than recording HPB's actual w= ords...." It was like she was made to do something in spite of hatred for H= PB, and thus actually refusing to do it by doing it in the worse and most i= nsinuating way, it not being valuable enough in her conventional christian = mind to actually transcribe. She even skipped whole pages of philosophy (".= .. a page and a half about pantheism etc..." - p. 428, No. 115) which she p= robably > found booring. 'And this under the aegis of an organization posing on its= supposed scientific exact methods, the SPR or British Society for Psychica= l Research! (Solovyoff likely suffered a similar transcription disease, on = personal animosity basis.)=20 > One "quote" seems particularly Sidgwick commentary falsely posing as HPB'= s thought: ".... Edison a Theosophist - description of phonograph - (graphi= c and clear) - .... phonographs might as easily as not be placed in the sta= tues of the caves of Ellora and Elephanta and the gods made to speak to the= multitudes for hours - truth and to convert them to pure atheism by the th= ousands." Rather stupid, and HPB didn't believe in conventional atheism, as= it is equivalent to materialism. > Two versions of supposedl