Theos-Talk Archives (October 2006 Message tt00062)

Daniel / Jake - I have been folowing all the interchange carefully and find
it all of interest. I think it is an important subject and I will post some
more extensive thoughts early next week. Some students of course will not
comment on this material as they belong to esoteric groups that consider it
still secret, but I am sure they won't mind reading what others are
discussing about it ! I will run it by some nearby Blavatsky/SD students
and see how they feel about the authenticity and significance of the
'Letter' and post their comments as well.

Ken

 


Original Message:
-----------------
From: danielhcaldwell danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 04:39:45 -0000
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Theos-World Jake on ES Instruction #5


I wrote:

========================================
Furthermore, why would Judge (after HPB's death) include portions of
this KH Concentration letter in E.S. Instruction #5 [IF it was 
phoney as Jake contends]?
========================================

To my comment, Jake replied:

========================================
This was also the LAST ES instruction sent out, and the lowest
in quality. Maybe it was the Last because mistakes were made or 
doubtful material used, and it was relized that they could no longer 
be issued reliably. Maybe whoever was typing up the Instruction 
inserted material (the short section containing the phoney adept 
letter could be removed without destroying the context, and the whole
Instruction would be in a more consistent "tone.")
========================================

Let me try to go over Jake's points.

[Point 1] "Maybe it was the Last because mistakes were made or 
doubtful material used, and it was relized that they could no longer 
be issued reliably."

Both ES Instructions #4 and #5 were issued AFTER HPB's death, but 
BEFORE Mr. Judge died in 1896.

And Mr. Judge was actually working on ES Instruction #6 in the last 
months of his life.  He writes in October, 1895:

"Additional Subsidiary Papers will be issued.  I am also preparing 
an additional main Instruction [that is, #6] which will of course go 
only to those thereto entitled and as they advance.  It is not yet 
possible to give the date for that coming issue, but it is under 
way.  Were I in better health it would be out very soon." ECHOES OF 
THE ORIENT, Volume III, p. 473, Point Loma Publications, San Diego, 
CA.

So we see that Mr. Judge was working on Instruction #6 JUST 6 months 
before he died.

So as far as I can see, Jake's above "maybe" speculation doesn't 
accord with the evidence, that is, Mr. Judge's own words.

[Point 2] "Maybe whoever was typing up the Instruction inserted 
material (the short section containing the phoney adept letter could 
be removed without destroying the context, and the whole
Instruction would be in a more consistent 'tone.')"

Is Jake claiming that some person [who?] inserted the phoney 
material in this publication and Mr. Judge was totally unaware that 
this had happened??!!

You can see that Mr. Judge himself was working personally on 
Instruction #6.  Why wouldn't he have also been involved personally 
with Instruction #5?

Furthermore, there were at least TWO editions of Instruction #5 
issued during Mr. Judge's lifetime.  The last edition was issued 
probably in 1895 AFTER the split between Mr. Judge and Mrs. Besant 
occurred.

Both editions have the phoney letter....

Is Jake trying to tell us that Mr. Judge was so careless and so 
inattentive that he would not be aware (as Outer Co-Head or Outer 
Head of the Esoteric School) of what was published in this 
Instruction with his name appended at the end?

Plus please remember that these "phoney" quotes that wound up in ES 
Instruction #5 are to be found in Mr. Judge's own personal diary for 
Oct.-Dec. 1888.

If Mr. Judge transcribed this so-called "phoney" letter in his own 
1888 diary, is it such a stretch to conclude that he also included 
it in ES Instruction #5?

I could be missing something here, but it seems to me that Jake is 
bending over backwards to try to explain away this so-
called "phoney" material.

"Maybe this or maybe that" ....all of which appears to be sheer 
speculation that isn't supported by any of the historical records.

[Point 3]

Jake writes that Instruction #5 was the "lowest in quality."

As compared to the 5 preceding Instructions?

Now I have no idea how Jake came to the determination that #5 
is "lowest in quality."

But I do know that the bulk of material in ES Instruction #5 (as 
well as the bulk in Instruction #4) comes directly from H.P. 
Blavatsky's own recorded teachings to her Inner Group. 

This is all well documented by Dr. Henk Spirenburg and myself in an 
Appendix in the second edition of THE INNER GROUP TEACHINGS OF H.P. 
BLAVATSKY which is available from Point Loma Publications.  See this 
title listed at:

http://www.wisdomtraditions.com/plpfiles/blavatsky.html

So is this HPB material in #5 lower in quality than the material in 
#4?

Since Ken Small has commented on some of the material in #5, he 
might want to give his opinion on this particular topic....

Daniel
http://hpb.cc













--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .