Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

An Issue of Fairness and Consistency

Expand Messages
  • Daniel H. Caldwell
    Wry, you wrote in part: I have taken the time to write this message because I believe some uninformed people, who do not understand how various devices that
    Message 1 of 7 , May 3, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Wry, you wrote in part:

      "I have taken the time to write this message because I believe some
      uninformed people, who do not understand how various devices that can
      be used to convey certain information that is not for everyone ,
      might construe Daniel's message to be a form of nitpicking, which it
      most emphatically is not."

      Wry, thanks for your comments. From my perspective it is not a
      matter of "nitpicking" but an issue of fairness and consistency.

      Below I post something on the issue of fairness & consistency that I
      wrote on Theos-Talk almost two years ago.
      -------------------------------------------------------------

      Subject: "In U.L.T. I don't have t[o] worry -- the originals are
      available on a reliable basis. . . ." ??????????????

      Dallas writes in part: [My comments follow his comments.]
      ----------------------------------------------------

      "If you wish I can give you as an example the little book that the
      Adyar Theosophical Publishing House issued under H.P.Blavatsky's
      name as PRACTICAL OCCULTISM It is one of the articles she wrote.
      If you have a copy then compare it with the same article you have
      reprinted by the U.L.T. in OCCULTISM OR RAJA-YOGA. The U.L.T.
      is verbatim from H.P.Blavatsky's original article -- remember
      proof reading it myself years ago. The ADYAR version has been
      heavily edited. Then into that soup a creedal article by a
      Brahmin originally printed in Vol. 10 of THEOSOPHIST is
      introduced ( not H.P.Blavatsky at all) -- I made a comparison
      and have a full description of the discrepancies. I sent this to
      the Theosophical Publishing House in Adyar and the H O of the
      Indian Section THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY in Benares -- but they never
      acknowledged it nor did then change their printing."

      "Another discrepancy list with over 43,000 changes is the reprint
      in 1893 of The SECRET DOCTRINE (Vols. I and II) by the
      Theosophical Publishing House in London after the original plates
      were worn and no longer usable. This is easily checked.

      "Vol. III of The SECRET DOCTRINE as edited by A. Besant is a hodge
      podge of unedited MSS that H.P.Blavatsky had in her drawers at
      the time of her death -- it was material intended to go into
      LUCIFER, even some MSS held over from THEOSOPHIST.

      "No, I am not making a case for the continuation of any special
      Body. I am indicating the differences. In U.L.T. I don't have
      t[o] worry -- the originals are available on a reliable basis
      yet=s, I have in many cases proof read and verified them with
      the ORIGINALS. -- and I have done the same thing with the 15 (or
      so) volumes of BLAVATSKY: COLLECTED WORKS. . . .

      "I do not know whether you have the edited or unedited versions
      which came out more recently. If you compare your copies with
      H.P.Blavatsky's originals you will soon know if they have been
      changed. In some cases the changes may be trivial, but in other
      cases as I read, the changes make the original MEANING UNCLEAR.

      "Personally I would rather deal with H.P.Blavatsky's "mistakes"
      than with those created by others who have had the temerity to
      believe they knew better than she did, and had the audacity to
      introduce changes which she did not authorize. Strong language,
      but true if it is applicable."
      -----------------------------------

      DANIEL COMMENTS AS FOLLOWS:

      Dallas, I am totally dumbfounded that you would bring up the above
      items without ALSO commenting on MODERN PANARION (a collection of
      HPB's articles) reprinted by the Theosophy Company and the edition of
      HPB's VOICE OF THE SILENCE also published by the Theosophy Company.

      Concerning HPB's article PRACTICAL OCCULTISM, Dallas, you write:

      "The U.L.T. is verbatim from H.P.Blavatsky's original article --
      remember proof reading it myself years ago. The ADYAR version has
      been heavily edited."

      Have you compared HPB's articles in MODERN PANARION with H.P.
      Blavatsky's original articles? Dallas, are the articles in MODERN
      PANARION verbatim with HPB's original articles?

      In fact as you should know since I posted comparisons about a year or
      so ago on several theosophical forums, the ULT/THEOSOPHY CO.'s
      reprint of MODERN PANARION has been HEAVILY EDITED.

      And what about the Theosophy Company's version of THE VOICE OF THE
      SILENCE? You know that this version has more than 500 changes
      trivial or otherwise. Do you consider this edition verbatim with the
      original 1889 edition of the VOICE? Before you answer that please
      define what you mean by "verbatim".

      You write concerning the PRACTICAL OCCULTISM article:

      "The U.L.T. [edition] is verbatim from H.P.Blavatsky's original
      article -- remember proof reading it myself years ago. The ADYAR
      version has been heavily edited."

      What do you mean here when you use the word "verbatim"? What do you
      mean by writing that the ADYAR version is not verbatim.

      Keeping in mind your use of the word "verbatim" above, compare the
      Theosophical University Press edition of the VOICE with the ULT's
      version of the VOICE. TUP's edition is verbatim. Can it truly be
      stated that the ULT's version of the VOICE is ALSO verbatim?

      Furthermore, the 500 + changes in the ULT's VOICE are UNMARKED
      CHANGES. In recently published statements of yours, you say you are
      against editions of HPB's works that are edited and the CHANGES are
      UNMARKED. Yet for reasons unknown to me, you prefer to use and quote
      from the ULT's edition of the VOICE with more than 500 + changes that
      are UNMARKED.

      Dallas, you are willing to criticize Adyar for their edition of
      PRACTICAL OCCULTISM and even willing to write to them listing the
      changes and then commenting: "but they never acknowledged it nor did
      then change their printing."

      I'm curious Dallas, have you protested to the Theosophy Company about
      the numerous changes in MODERN PANARION and the ULT's edition of the
      VOICE? Did you send them a list of the changes? Are you asking THE
      THEOSOPHY COMPANY in their next printing of these two titles to
      remove their changes (which HPB did NOT approve) and publish
      facsimiles of HPB's original VOICE and of her original articles?

      So Dallas, is your statement:

      "In U.L.T. I don't have t[o] worry -- the originals are available on
      a reliable basis. . . ."

      REALLY TRUE???????????

      Dallas, why do you continue to criticize the Adyar editions of HPB's
      writings while using the above two mentioned publications by the
      Theosophy Company?

      Daniel H. Caldwell
      BLAVATSKY STUDY CENTER/BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
      http://blavatskyarchives.com
    • Daniel H. Caldwell
      Wes recently wrote on this forum: . . . when Judge reprinted The Voice of the Silence in New York in 1893, he did some minor editing and rearranged the
      Message 2 of 7 , May 6, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Wes recently wrote on this forum:

        ". . . when Judge reprinted 'The Voice of the Silence' in New York in
        1893, he did some minor editing and rearranged the footnotes to
        appear on the text pages instead of at the back of the book. So, when
        The Theosophy Company went to re-publish the Voice, there were two
        editions to choose from: Blavatsky's and Judge's. Which one should we
        have published? HPB's 'original' text, or Judge's edition which was a
        bit easier to use? The Theosophy Company editors apparently decided
        to use Judge's, relying on his known skill as an editor."

        But compare the above with what Dallas wrote previously on this forum:

        "In U.L.T. I don't have t[o] worry -- the originals are available on
        a reliable basis. . . . Personally I would rather deal with
        H.P.Blavatsky's 'mistakes' than with those created by others who have
        had the temerity to believe they knew better than she did, and had
        the audacity to introduce changes which she did not authorize. Strong
        language, but true if it is applicable."

        A detailed example of the "minor(?) editing" Judge did can be found
        in the following article:

        "Thin Oblong Squares" pp. 1-4
        http://www.teosofia.com/Docs/vol-2-10.pdf

        As the writer observes later in the same article:

        "Clearly then, this is no mistake [by HPB], no idle phrase or term
        that HPB is using in the Voice. So again, one might ask why [did
        Judge] change it in the Voice Of The Silence, why [did he] remove the
        word 'squares' to leave the phrase 'thin oblongs'?"

        To paraphrase Dallas' "strong language," did Judge have the temerity
        to believe he knew better than she did? Did he have the audacity to
        introduce changes which she did not authorize?

        Probably, when Dallas was using his "strong language", he was
        referring to Besant, Mead or de Zirkoff and their "editing" of
        H.P.B.'s writings. But what's good for the goose is good for the
        gander, right?

        It would appear from the article that H.P. Blavatsky knew exactly
        what she was doing when she wrote "thin oblong squares."

        In this instance Judge's "minor editing" created a new mistake; it
        was not a mistake by HPB!

        Daniel H. Caldwell
        BLAVATSKY STUDY CENTER/BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
        http://blavatskyarchives.com
      • Daniel H. Caldwell
        See: http://www.theos-talk.com/archives/200305/tt00044.html for more comments on the editing of the Theosophy Company s edition of THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE.
        Message 3 of 7 , Apr 8 4:02 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          See:

          http://www.theos-talk.com/archives/200305/tt00044.html

          for more comments on the editing of the
          Theosophy Company's edition of THE VOICE OF THE
          SILENCE.

          Daniel
          http://blavatskyarchives.com
        • Vladimir
          ... Daniel, do you know if The Key to Theosophy , The Secret Doctrine and Isis Unveiled reprinted by the ULT have any discrepancies from the originals?
          Message 4 of 7 , Apr 9 12:10 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Saturday, April 9, 2005, 3:02:39 AM, Daniel wrote:

            > See:
            > http://www.theos-talk.com/archives/200305/tt00044.html
            > for more comments on the editing of the
            > Theosophy Company's edition of THE VOICE OF THE
            > SILENCE.

            Daniel, do you know if "The Key to Theosophy", "The Secret Doctrine"
            and "Isis Unveiled" reprinted by the ULT have any discrepancies from
            the originals? These are claimed to be facsimiles. Are they indeed?


            Best regards,
            Vladimir
          • M. Sufilight
            I think, that the original cover of The Secret Doctrine has been changed a bit. The proces of printing the book is also different. The paper used as pages is
            Message 5 of 7 , Apr 9 2:01 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              I think, that the original cover of "The Secret Doctrine" has been changed a
              bit.
              The proces of printing the book is also different. The paper used as pages
              is - as far as I know - also of a different kind.


              M. Sufilight


              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Vladimir" <forums@...>
              To: "Daniel H. Caldwell" <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2005 9:10 AM
              Subject: Re: Theos-World HPB on "thin oblong squares" as found in the
              original edition of THE VOICE


              >
              > Saturday, April 9, 2005, 3:02:39 AM, Daniel wrote:
              >
              >> See:
              >> http://www.theos-talk.com/archives/200305/tt00044.html
              >> for more comments on the editing of the
              >> Theosophy Company's edition of THE VOICE OF THE
              >> SILENCE.
              >
              > Daniel, do you know if "The Key to Theosophy", "The Secret Doctrine"
              > and "Isis Unveiled" reprinted by the ULT have any discrepancies from
              > the originals? These are claimed to be facsimiles. Are they indeed?
              >
              >
              > Best regards,
              > Vladimir
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
            • Daniel H. Caldwell
              Vladimir, You wrote: Daniel, do you know if The Key to Theosophy , The Secret Doctrine and Isis Unveiled reprinted by the ULT have any discrepancies from
              Message 6 of 7 , Apr 9 7:26 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                Vladimir,

                You wrote:

                "Daniel, do you know if 'The Key to Theosophy',
                'The Secret Doctrine' and 'Isis Unveiled' reprinted
                by the ULT have any discrepancies from the originals?
                These are claimed to be facsimiles. Are they indeed?"

                AFAIK, these three reprints are photographic
                facsimiles of the originals.

                Daniel
                http://blavatskyarchives.com
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.