Blavatsky's original edition of _The Secret Doctrine_
constitutes the most colossal case of corruption of an original
text to be found in history. A group of students is comparing
the original edition with the "third and revised edition,"
edited by Annie Besant and G. R. S. Mead, after the author's
death.... I am informed by those making the comparison [that]
... the actual changes will be far more than twenty thousand.
Many of these changes are trivial and one wonders at the
impertinence or conceit which inspired them. Some of the
changes--those which might have put students on their guard
against the so-called Third Volume--can only be construed as
deliberate and intentional suppressions and corruptions of the
original text. And this in a work of which the Master K. H.
wrote: "Every mistake or erroneous notion corrected and
explained by her from the works of other Theosophists was
corrected by me or under my instruction." The true title of the
"third and revised edition" should be "_The Secret Doctrine_,
written by H. P. Blavatsky, corrected and approved by the
Master K. H., and corrupted by Annie Besant." It is almost
impossible to comprehend the colossal conceit, the limitless
contempt for common literary decency which could have inspired
such an act of vandalism, to say nothing of such disrespect for
the Master whom she professes to venerate. And all of this is
put forth as the work of H. P. Blavatsky herself, with the mere
apology in the preface that "Had H. P. Blavatsky lived to issue
the new edition, she would doubtless have corrected and
enlarged it to a very considerable extent." What a specious
excuse? [Repeated in the preface to the alleged Vol. III.--A.
L. C.] Had H. P. B. "corrected and enlarged it" it would
without doubt have been done under the same guidance and
authority which directed and corrected the first edition. It is
enough to cast suspicion on each and every quotation of
original sources made by Mrs. Besant, and her emendation of the
Theosophy of H. P. B. as well. (October 12th, 1921.)
As for the third volume, edited and published after the death
of H. P. B. from manuscripts left by her, nobody knows, in the
absence of a previous edition issued by her, how much of it is
H. P. B.'s and how much is not, but there is good evidence that
much of it is not, which is the more likely in view of the
vandalisms the same editors perpetrated in the first two
volumes. In no sense can the "third and revised edition" be
said to be a re-print of the original _Secret Doctrine_ of H.
P. Blavatsky. (December 21st, 1921.)
I most fully endorse all that Dr. Stokes so ably demonstrates, and I can
quite believe that, in regard to Vol. III, some of the contents are not
by H. P. B.-- the style in places is not hers at all. But I can
enlighten him as to those portions of the contents of which I have
actual knowledge. I may here add that, when my own group of students
were checking the "third and revised edition" of the first and second
volumes of _The Secret Doctrine_ by the original edition of 1888, they
came across no less than four specific references by H. P. B. to Vols.
III and IV as being practically completed, _viz._, Vol. I, Preface, and
p. 11; Vol. II, pp. 437, 798, 1st Ed., 1888. Mrs. Besant coolly deleted
all these without a word of explanation!
How unnecessary nearly all of this so-called "revision" was, can be
realised in the Keightleys' accounts (see Countess Wachtmeister's book)
of the care taken over the proofs of the first edition. Mr. Bertram
Keightley says they first "read the whole mass of MSS.--a pile over
three feet high--most carefully through, correcting the English and
punctuation where absolutely indispensable." (Contrast this modesty and
respect for the author with the spirit that perpetrated the thirty
thousand corrections in the "third edition"!) It was then arranged under
H. P. B.'s supervision in Sections, etc., and professionally
typewritten. This first copy was again revised and any obscurities
explained. It should be noted here that Mr. Keightley says they laid
before H. P. B. "a plan, suggested by the character of the matter
itself, _viz._, to make the work consist of four volumes ... to follow
the natural order of exposition and begin with the Evolution of Cosmos,
to pass from that to the Evolution of Man, then to deal with the
historical part in a third volume treating of the lives of some great
Occultists, and of 'Practical Occultism' in a fourth." This proves that
at least the whole of the material for Vol. III was actually there (Dr.
Keightley elsewhere states that it was _ready for the printer_.)
Finally the Keightleys themselves set to work to type out a fair copy
of Vols. I and II for the printer. "H. P. B. read and corrected two sets
of galley proofs, then a page proof, and finally a revise in sheet,
correcting, adding, and altering up to the very last moment."
Dr. A. Keightley says:--" ... no work and no trouble, no suffering or
pain could daunt her from her task. Crippled with rheumatism, suffering
from a disease which had several times nearly proved fatal, she still
worked on unflaggingly, writing at her desk the moment her eyes and
fingers could guide the pen.... We had to carry on the general scheme
... to act as watch-dogs and help her to make the meaning as clear as
possible. But all the work was hers ... it went through three or four
other hands besides H. P. B.'s in galley proof, as well as in revise.
She was her own most severe corrector...."
Another able helper was Mr. E. Douglas Fawcett, the well-known author of
_The Riddle of the Universe_, of whom both the Keightleys speak in terms
of high praise. His profound knowledge of science, philosophy, and
metaphysics was invaluable. "He supplied many of the quotations from
scientific works, as well as many confirmations of the occult doctrines
derived from similar sources."
And this monumental work, produced with such meticulous care and
precautions against errors, is subjected to some thirty thousand
corrections by its subsequent "editors"! In all my study of the original
edition I have never found more than a few errors that matter in the
least, and these are mostly typographical and quite obvious to any
person of average intelligence. The marvel is that there are so few in a
work of such magnitude and scope. Those of my students who possess only
the "third and revised edition" (the first and second now being
scarce), have re-corrected it to agree with the first; and to look at
the pages covered with these re-corrections brings home to one, as
nothing else can, the force and justice of Dr. Stokes's indictment. Let
us hope that when H. P. B.'s great work is understood and accepted
seriously at its true worth, an indignant posterity will pass judgment
on one of the worst examples of literary vandalism in the nineteenth
century.
In her Preface to Vol. III, Mrs. Besant boldly states that, in regard to
the Sections entitled "The Mystery of Buddha," there are "very numerous
errors of fact, and many statements based on exoteric writings, not on
esoteric knowledge"! If her own statement with which I have dealt,
regarding the Pratyeka Buddha is to be taken as the measure of her
capacity to judge of the merit or demerit of H. P. B.'s work, all that
Mrs. Besant says, or skilfully suggests, in this Preface can be
dismissed as absolutely worthless. But in view of the fact that she then
believed herself to be acting under the direction of "a Master in the
flesh" (see Mr. Martyn's letter, _ante_ pp. 18-19 and footnote p. 56),
who happened to be _an orthodox Brahmin_, these unfounded pronouncements
which I quote with regard to the Sections on the Lord Buddha are perhaps
not so surprising. I use the word "unfounded" advisedly, for she makes
two separate statements as to the way in which she obtained the material
for this so-called Vol. III. She opens the Preface with the first
one:--"The task of preparing this volume for the press has been a
difficult and anxious one, and it is necessary to state clearly what has
been done." This is one of her usual formulas, after which she proceeds
to do the exact opposite. She thus continues, in fact:--"The papers
given to me by H. P. B...." But Mrs. Besant was not in England when H.
P. B. died, _quite unexpectedly_, and with only three of her pupils
present, namely, Mr. Claude Wright, Mr. Walter Old and Miss Laura Cooper
(now Mrs. G. R. S. Mead.) We were all summoned by telegram, and I was at
Avenue Road within a few hours. I never heard of any evidence that she
gave Mrs. Besant papers, or directions about papers, before the latter
left for America on a lecture tour; and most certainly H. P. B. never
formally "appointed" her, or anyone else, as her "successor," for the
very good reason that I have given elsewhere--that the movement had
definitely failed, and she was "recalled." (see _ante_ p. 2.)
To return to Mrs. Besant's Preface. Her second statement is that the
papers for the Sections on "The Mystery of the Buddha" were "given into
my hands to publish, as part of the Third Volume of _The Secret
Doctrine_...." _By whom_ were they "given"? Certainly not by H. P. B.;
and why does Mrs. Besant speak of these Sections on the Buddha as if
they were something apart from the "papers" she alleges she received
_from H. P. B._? Clearly any further analysis is useless, for in all
probability the truth about what really happened to all H. P. B.'s MSS.
after her death _will never be known_, since the few who do know will,
naturally, never speak.
Brushing aside, therefore, Mrs. Besant's "explanatory" Preface, Volume
III, as given to the public in 1897, appears to be simply a collection
of fugitive articles which, as I have shown, were obviously freely
edited. To pad out the volume (the MSS. spoken of by H. P. B. in Vols. I
and II, as already existing, having mysteriously vanished) Mrs. Besant
prints both the _E. S. T._ and the _Inner Group Instructions_, despite
the pledge of secrecy taken by her and all other recipients of these
teachings. In justification of this she states--_six years after H. P.
B.'s death_--that H. P. B. instructed her to do so! The worthlessness of
such "instructions" is palpable in the light of her naïve belief in the
alleged reincarnation of her Teacher in Mr. ----'s little daughter.
(Needless to add that, under Leadbeater, she has another version of this
idea!) We have the usual misleading and disingenuous statement in a
"Note" which is prefixed to these Instructions. Mrs. Besant
says:--"Papers I, II and III ... were written by H. P. B. and were
circulated privately during her lifetime"
_These "Papers" are the E. S. Instructions._ She calls those given to
the Inner Group "Notes of some Oral Teaching." But, with two exceptions,
almost _every word of both E. S. and I. G. Instructions are given
intact_, just as we received them; I possess them all. The two
exceptions are, first, the practical teachings, given at the first
meeting of the _I. G._, for Yoga development, which even Mrs. Besant had
not the hardihood to publish; and, second, a very long "Preliminary
Memorandum" to Instructions III.
FOOTNOTES:
[19] See also _An Introduction to Mahayâna Buddhism_, by W. M. McGovern,
1922. Kegan Paul. He confirms H. P. B.'s definition.
[20] It was ... during the highest point of civilisation and knowledge,
as also of human intellectuality, of ... the Atlantean Race that ...
humanity branched off into its two diametrically opposite paths; the
Right and the Left-hand paths of knowledge or of Vidya. "_Thus were the
germs of the White and the Black Magic sown in those days. The seeds lay
latent for some time, to sprout only during the early period of the
Fifth (our Race)._" (_Commentary_).--_The Secret Doctrine._ First
Edition, Vol. I, p. 192.
The Truth about the E. S. Council, and the Inner Group.
The E. S. Instructions were written by H. P. B. during the winter of
1888-89. The I. G. Teachings were given orally by H. P. B. at its
meetings in 1890-91. It was the duty of the two secretaries, Mrs. Besant
and Mr. Mead, to write these Teachings up, from notes sent in by _all of
us_, after each meeting, and record them in a book. This record was
dealt with at each succeeding meeting, corrected and often amplified by
H. P. B. All these _might_, therefore, have been included in Vol. IV of
_The Secret Doctrine_, according to the general plan of the work adopted
by H. P. B., if she had lived and had permitted it. Mrs. Besant's
statement that they were written with that in view is incorrect, and was
obviously made to justify her action in using them for her version of
Vol. III.
In the _Theosophist_ for March, 1922, Mrs. Besant published an article
in which several false statements are made concerning the history of the
E. S. The writer, a Mr. Fritz Kunz, quotes Colonel Olcott's _Old Diary
Leaves_ as authority for saying that "the first move towards founding
the E. S. was made in 1881," that it was "organised steadily through the
trials of 1884-85," and merely "announced" in 1888. The actual facts
(see _Theosophist_, April, 1880) are, that when H. P. B. established the
real THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY OR UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD at Benares in 1879
(the T. S. founded at New York in 1875 was only a "Miracle Club," as
Colonel Olcott says, with no "brotherhood plank"), it was on a purely
esoteric basis. It was under the direct guidance of the Trans-Himâlayan
Brotherhood, Who formed the First Section; the second and third being
for "accepted" and "probationary" _chelas_ respectively. When I joined
the T. S. in 1885, these rules were still in force in the London Lodge.
But Colonel Olcott insisted on an exoteric organisation with "the
occultism more in the background"; and the crisis of 1884-85, which
drove H. P. B. from India (see her letter of 1890, _ante_ p. 2), was the
natural result of this policy. Far from the E. S. being "organised
steadily" at that time, as Mr. Kunz asserts, H. P. B. makes it clear in
her letter that the Master's influence was "virtually banished" from
Adyar through lack of faith in Them, and failure to support her, and
that she had been ordered to "establish the Esoteric Section," at
London, which she did in 1888, because the necessary faith in the
Masters still existed there and in America.
Mr. Kunz then makes the astonishing assertion that the E. S. was
"transferred to Mrs. Annie Besant in due course by H. P. B. in 1891." As
I was a member of H. P. B.'s Inner Council which was responsible for
what was done after her death, I am in a position to state the true
facts as known to me, and as they appear in the E. S. documents in my
possession. These _facts_ are:--When H. P. B. died--suddenly and
unexpectedly, on May 8th, 1891[21]., Mr. Judge at once came over from
New York, and after much consultation and informal meetings of the E. S.
Council (composed of the I. G. members) and two others, Mr. Wm.
Kingsland and Dr. W. Wynn Westcott), a formal and "full meeting of the
Council" was held at Headquarters on May 27th, 1891, when "Bro. Wm. Q.
Judge attended _as the representative of H. P. B._ under a general power
given as below." (Italics mine.--A. L. C.)
"As Head of the Esoteric Section of the Theosophical Society, I hereby
declare that William Q. Judge, of New York, U.S., in virtue of his
character as a _chela_ of thirteen years' standing, and of the trust and
confidence reposed in him, is my only representative for said Section in
America, and he is the sole channel through whom will be sent and
received all communications between the members of said Section and
myself, and to him full faith, confidence and credit in that regard are
to be given, .*. Done at London this fourteenth day of December, 1888,
and in the fourteenth year of the Theosophical Society.
[Seal] H. P. Blavatsky,
" ... The Council passed the following minute....
That it was resolved and recorded that the highest officials in the
School for the present are Annie Besant and William Q. Judge, in
accordance with the above-quoted order to William Q. Judge of December,
1888, and with the order of April 1st, 1891, to Annie Besant, as well as
with the written declaration of H. P. B. in a letter to William Q. Judge
dated March 27th, 1891, which we now here have read, in which she wrote
that Annie Besant should be so considered. The order of April 1st, 1891,
is as follows:--
I hereby appoint, in the name of the Master, Annie Besant Chief
Secretary of the Inner Group of the Esoteric Section and
Recorder of the Teachings.[22]
H. P. B., [asterism dots]
Finally, we--the Council--declared over our signatures that "from
henceforth with Annie Besant and William Q. Judge rest the full charge
and management of the School."
Thus did _the Council_ establish the "Dual Headship," and until her
meeting with Mr. ----, two years later, and her subsequent visit to
India, Mrs. Besant continued to work harmoniously with Mr. Judge in the
management of the School.
A full report of this Council meeting was immediately sent out to the
whole E. S., bearing the date May 27th, 1891. Attached to it was an
"Address" signed by Mrs. Besant and Mr. Judge as joint "Outer Heads,"
declaring that these "changes in the Constitution of the School" having
been "made _by the joint Councils of the_ E. S. T." (Italics mine.--A.
L. C.), they considered it their "duty" to issue this address to each
member.
_The one error_, and the foundation of all subsequent ones, as I
subsequently realised, was that of speaking of themselves as H. P. B.'s
"agents and representatives after her departure"; for there is nothing
whatever in the wording of the abovementioned official appointments
which even suggests such a contingency. _Both_ obviously could refer to
the holders of them only _during_ H. P. B.'s _life-time_. Indeed, Mr.
Judge's was made when the School was founded, and had been operative
ever since; while Mrs. Besant's was merely an official confirmation of a
secretarial office she had filled since the formation of the I. G.
scarcely nine months previously (thus giving her the precedence of Mr.
Mead.) It will be seen, however, that Mr. Judge's appointment was a far
more important one than Mrs. Besant's, and was conferred on him "in
virtue of his character as _a chela of thirteen years' standing_";
whereas Mrs. Besant had been "on probation" _only_, for barely a year.
Moreover, when Mr. Judge became the object of attacks in 1889, H. P. B.
issued the following very significant notice:--
"LONDON,
_October 23rd, 1889_.
"The Esoteric Section and its life in the U. S. A. depends upon
W. Q. J. remaining its agent and what he is now. The day W. Q.
J. resigns H. P. B. will be virtually dead for the Americans.
W. Q. J. is the Antaskarana between the two _Manas(es)_, the
American thought and the Indian--or rather the trans-Himâlayan
esoteric knowledge. _Dixi._
H. P. B. [asterism dots]
"_P. S._--W. Q. J. had better show and impress _this_ on the
mind of _all those it may concern_."
This notice appeared in an E. S. paper issued by Mrs. Besant and Mr.
Judge, dated July 18th, 1894, when Mrs. Besant was already implicated in
the plot against Mr. Judge.
Mrs. Besant's appointment, given above, was the only official one she
ever received from H. P. B. in either the E. S. or T. S. Certainly I
never heard of anything else. The absolutely Jesuitical nature of her
methods is patent, in that she _completely ignores_ the documentary
facts set forth above. To read the present statements it might be
imagined that Mr. Judge hardly existed at that time, except as an
obscure person who, as Mr. Kunz tactfully (!) puts it, made an
"unfortunate blunder." As I have shown elsewhere (see _ante_ pp 5, 70);
it is the fact that "blunders"--and worse than blunders--were made after
H. P. B.'s death (see _ante_ p. 86); but Mrs. Besant's "blunders" were
far more serious than Mr. Judge's; though both of them were, in the
first instance, misled by others, whose real aim was to disrupt the
Society and defeat H. P. B.'s work.
I possess a copy of the previously mentioned most valuable "Preliminary
Memorandum" to Instructions III, as issued by H. P. B. to her students;
and a prefatory note states:--
The following "Preliminary Memorandum" was written by H. P. B.
at the time of a grave crisis, or rather series of crises,
through which the T. S. passed in 1889-90. Treachery within the
E. S. itself, and persistent and relentless attacks on the T.
S. from without, especially in America necessitated the
striking of a fresh keynote and giving directions for the
closing up of the ranks of the E. S. At the time of reprinting
the Instructions in London in 1890-91, certain portions of this
"Preliminary Memorandum" dealing with the details of the matter
were purposely omitted by those of H. P. B.'s pupils who were
constituted the editors [Mrs. Besant and Mr. Mead], these
portions being deemed by them of too personal a character to
remain. This was done when H. P. B. was too ill to supervise,
without her sanction, and, as she afterwards said, much against
her wishes. [Some of the details omitted related to attacks on
Mr. Judge, and the duty of defending him "when the time
comes."]
Similarly, Mr. Mead omitted from his "third and revised edition" of H.
P. B.'s _Key to Theosophy_, published in 1893, most of the part in
which the author deals with the Report of the Society for Psychical
Research, classing it with "passages of a controversial nature, which
are no longer of general interest." Yet the public at large still accept
this Report as a proof that H. P. B. was a fraud, a charlatan, and a
Russian spy!
Another feature of this edition, as of others of her works produced after
her death, is what he calls "a systematic use of italics and capitals."
This means that he abandons H. P. B.'s extremely effective use of large
and small capitals and italics to emphasise the importance of words like
MYSTERIES, OCCULTISM, WISDOM-RELIGION, etc., or SELF, ~Self~, and _Self_
to indicate the three different selves in man, and so robs her text of
much of its emphasis and meaning. One has to compare her editions with
these posthumos ounes to realise the extent to which this has been done.
It is particularly noticeable in _The Voice of the Silence_, where the
exact meaning often depends on the distinctions H. P. B. thus makes. (See
her article on Occultism quoted _ante_ p. 31).
CONCLUSION.
If the "Back to Blavatsky" movement accomplishes nothing else, let us
hope it may succeed in getting rid of all this vandalism and
re-establishing H. P. B.'s works on their original basis, that she may
go down to posterity on her own merits and not altered and distorted by
the brain-mind notions of her followers. Some of this work is already
being done by organisations or private enterprise, but it needs to be
systematised and co-ordinated.[23] Although the "door" had to be "shut"
at the end of 1899, H. P. B. in her last paragraph of the _Key to
Theosophy_ expressed the hope that, "when the time comes for the effort
of the twentieth century [_i.e._, in 1975], besides a large and
accessible literature ready to men's hands, the next impulse will find a
numerous and _united_ body of people ready to welcome the new
Torch-bearer of Truth."
It has been my painful task to show how lamentably we have failed to
realise her hopes. The "_united_ body" she sacrificed so much to create
and hold together, was disrupted barely four years after her death; the
main body under the Besant-Leadbeater _régime_ is following strange
gods; while the great literary legacy left by H. P. B. has not only been
seriously tampered with, but even largely superseded and obscured by
books which will certainly not be of any assistance to the next
"Torch-Bearer."
Some years ago I founded an H. P. B. Lending Library with my original
editions of her works, and others that are reliable and in line with her
teaching. It has already done much good, especially among those who have
been misled and kept in ignorance of them. If others would do the same
we can in time hope to stem the tide of evil and error, and preserve H.
P. B.'s message untainted until 1975. It is now within the life-span of
our younger students, many of whom, as the children of Theosophists,
have been brought up on the teachings and will bridge the gap for us.