Theos-Talk Archives (June 1998 Message tt00106)

There has been a great deal of discussion regarding HPB's "THEOSOPHICAL
MAHATMAS."   Though reference has been made to the section she devotes
to this in THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY, pp.286-301 be read.  It may be that
some would find it easier to find it quoted here in Theos-talk.  So I
have made the effort of quoting most of what she says in the next to
last chapter of the KEY.  Expressing her regrets that their Sacred names
have become household ones and "…fervently wishes that they had been
kept secret within a small circle of trusted and devoted friends."

It is likely that H. P. Blavatsky's own words will carry to a greater
extent the energy and clarity of intent than any used by students of her
doctrine.  I have taken the liberty of CAPITALISING certain portions of
this quotation for those-who might be,  in  too much of a hurry or
require a quick reference and do not like to read long quotations.

                           "XIV.

              THE  "THEOSOPHICAL  MAHATMAS"
                         _________

   ARE  THEY  "SPIRITS  OF  LIGHT "  OR  "GOBLINS  DAMN'D" ?

ENQ.	Who are they, finally, those whom you call your "Masters" ?  Some
say they are "Spirits," or some other kind of supernatural beings, while
others call them "myths."
THEO.	They are neither.  I once heard one outsider say to another that
they were a sort of male mermaids, whatever such a creature may be.  BUT
IF YOU LISTEN TO WHAT PEOPLE SAY, YOU WILL NEVER HAVE A TRUE CONCEPTION
OF THEM.  IN THE FIRST PLACE THEY ARE LIVING MEN, BORN AS WE ARE BORN,
AND DOOMED TO DIE LIKE EVERY OTHER MORTAL.
ENQ.	Yes, but it is rumoured that some of them are a thousand years old.
Is this true ?
THEO.	As true as the miraculous growth of hair on the head of Meredith's
Shagpat.  Truly, like the "Identical," no Theosophical shaving has
hitherto been able to crop it.  THE MORE WE DENY THEM, THE MORE WE TRY
TO SET PEOPLE RIGHT, THE MORE ABSURD DO THE INVENTIONS BECOME. I have
heard of Methuselah being 969 years old; but, not being forced to
believe in it, have laughed at the statement, for which I was forthwith
regarded by many as a blasphemous heretic.
ENQ.	Seriously, though they outlive the ordinary age of men ?
THEO.	What do you call the ordinary age ?  I remember reading in the
Lancet of a Mexican who was almost 190 years old ;  BUT I HAVE NEVER
HEARD OF MORTAL MAN, LAYMAN, OR ADEPT, WHO COULD LIVE EVEN HALF THE
YEARS ALLOTTED TO METHUSELAH.  SOME ADEPTS DO EXCEED, BY A GOOD DEAL,
WHAT YOU WOULD CALL THE ORDINARY AGE ;  YET THERE IS NOTHING MIRACULOUS
IN IT, AND VERY FEW OF THEM CARE TO LIVE VERY LONG.
ENQ.	But what does the word "MAHATMA" really mean ?
THEO.	SIMPLY A "GREAT SOUL," GREAT THROUGH MORAL ELEVATION AND
INTELLECTUAL ATTAINMENT.  If the title of great is given to a drunken
soldier like Alexander, WHY SHOULD WE NOT CALL THOSE "GREAT" WHO HAVE
ACHIEVED FAR GREATER CONQUESTS IN NATURE'S SECRETS, than Alexander ever
did on the field of battle ?  Besides, the term is an Indian and a very
old word.
ENQ.	And why do you call them "Masters" ?
THEO.	WE CALL THEM "MASTERS" BECAUSE THEY ARE OUR TEACHERS;  AND BECAUSE
FROM THEM WE HAVE DERIVED ALL THE THEOSOPHICAL TRUTHS, HOWEVER
INADEQUATELY SOME OF US MAY HAVE EXPRESSED, AND OTHERS UNDERSTOOD, THEM.
THEY ARE MEN OF GREAT LEARNING, WHOM WE TERM INITIATES, AND STILL
GREATER HOLINESS OF LIFE.  THEY ARE NOT ASCETICS IN THE ORDINARY SENSE,
THOUGH THEY CERTAINLY REMAIN APART FROM THE TURMOIL AND STRIFE OF YOUR
WESTERN WORLD.
ENQ.	But is it not selfish thus to isolate themselves ?
THEO.	Where is the selfishness ?  DOES NOT THE FATE OF THE THEOSOPHICAL
SOCIETY SUFFICIENTLY PROVE THAT THE WORLD IS NEITHER READY TO RECOGNISE
THEM NOR TO PROFIT BY THEIR TEACHING ?  Of what use would Professor
Clerk Maxwell have been to instruct a class of little boys in their
multiplication-table ?  Besides, they isolate themselves only from the
West.  In their own country they go about as publicly as other people
do.
ENQ.	Don't you ascribe to them supernatural powers ?
THEO.	We believe in nothing supernatural, as I have told you already.
Had Edison lived and invented his phonograph two hundred years ago, he
would most probably have been burnt along with it, and the whole
attributed to the devil.  THE POWERS WHICH THEY EXERCISE ARE SIMPLY THE
DEVELOPMENT OF POTENCIES LYING LATENT IN EVERY MAN AND WOMEN, AND THE
EXISTENCE OF WHICH EVEN OFFICIAL SCIENCE BEGINS TO RECOGNISE.
ENQ.	Is it true that these men inspire some of your writers, and that
many, if not all, of your Theosophical works were written under their
dictation ?
THEO.	SOME HAVE.  THERE ARE PASSAGES ENTIRELY DICTATED BY THEM AND
VERBATIM, BUT IN MOST CASES THEY ONLY INSPIRE THE IDEAS AND LEAVE THE
LITERARY FORM TO THE WRITERS.
ENQ.	But this in itself is miraculous ;  is, in fact, a miracle. How can
they do it ?
THEO.	My dear Sir, you are labouring under a great mistake, and it is
science itself that will refute your argument at no distant day.  Why
should it be a  "miracle," as you call it ?  A miracle is supposed to
mean some operation which is supernatural, whereas there is really
nothing above or beyond NATURE and Nature's laws.  Among the many forms
of the "miracle" which have come under modern scientific recognition,
there is Hypnotism, and one phase of its power is known as "Suggestion,"
a form of thought transference, which has been successfully used in
combating particular physical diseases, etc.  THE TIME IS NOT FAR
DISTANT WHEN THE WORLD OF SCIENCE WILL BE FORCED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT
THERE EXISTS AS MUCH INTERACTION BETWEEN ONE MIND AND ANOTHER, NO MATTER
AT WHAT DISTANCE, AS BETWEEN ONE BODY AND ANOTHER IN CLOSEST CONTACT.
WHEN TWO MINDS ARE SYMPATHETICALLY RELATED, AND THE INSTRUMENTS THROUGH
WHICH THEY FUNCTION ARE TUNED TO RESPOND MAGNETICALLY AND ELECTRICALLY
TO ONE ANOTHER, THERE IS NOTHING WHICH WILL PREVENT THE TRANSMISSION OF
THOUGHTS FROM ONE TO THE OTHER, AT WILL ;  FOR SINCE THE MIND IS NOT OF
A TANGIBLE NATURE, THAT DISTANCE CAN DIVIDE IT FROM THE SUBJECT OF ITS
CONTEMPLATION, IT FOLLOWS THAT THE ONLY DIFFERENCE THAT CAN EXIST
BETWEEN TWO MINDS IS A DIFFERENCE OF STATE.  SO IF THIS LATER HINDRANCE
IS OVERCOME, WHERE IS THE "MIRACLE" OF THOUGHT TRANSFERENCE, AT WHATEVER
DISTANCE ?
ENQ.	But you will admit the Hypnotism does nothing so miraculous or
wonderful as that ?
THEO.	On the contrary, it is a well-established fact that a Hypnotist
can affect the brain of his subject so far as to produce an expression
of his own thoughts, and even his words, through the organism of his
subject ; and although the phenomena attaching to this method of actual
thought transference are as yet few in number, no one, I presume, will
undertake to say how far their action may extend in the future, when the
laws that govern their production are more scientifically established.
And so, if such results can be produced by the knowledge of the mere
rudiments of Hypnotism, WHAT CAN PREVENT THE ADEPT IN PSYCHIC AND
SPIRITUAL POWERS FROM PRODUCING RESULTS WHICH WITH YOUR PRESENT LIMITED
KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR LAWS, YOU ARE INCLINED TO CALL "MIRACULOUS"?
ENQ.	Then why do not our physicians experiment and try if they could not
do as much ?  *
   *     Such, for instance, as Prof. Bernheim and Dr. C. Lloyd Tuckey,
of England ;  Professors Beaunis and Liégeois, of Nancy ;  Delbœuf of
Liege ;  Burot and Bourru, of Rochefort ;  Fontain and Sigard, of
Bordeaux ;  Forel, of  Zurich ;  and Drs. Despine, of Marseilles ;  Van
Renterghem and Van Eeden, of Amsterdam ;  Wetterstrand, of Stockholm ;
Schrenck-Notzing, of Leipzig, and many other physicians and writers of
eminence.
THEO.	Because, first of all, they are not Adepts with a thorough
understanding of the secrets and laws of psychic and spiritual realms,
but materialists, afraid to step outside the narrow groove of matter ;
and,  secondly, because they must fail at present, and indeed until
they  are  brought  to  acknowledge  such powers  are  attainable.
ENQ.	And could they be taught ?
THEO.	Not unless they were first of all prepared, by having the
materialistic dross they have accumulated in their brains swept away to
the very last atom.
ENQ.	This is very interesting.  Tell me, have THE ADEPTS THUS INSPIRED
OR DICTATED TO MANY OF YOUR THEOSOPHISTS ?
THEO.	NO, ON THE CONTRARY, TO VERY FEW.  SUCH OPERATIONS REQUIRE SPECIAL
CONDITIONS.  An unscrupulous but skilled Adept of the Black Brotherhood
("Brothers of the Shadow," and Dugpas, we call them )  has far less
difficulties to labour under.  For, having no laws of the Spiritual kind
to trammel his actions, such a Dugpa "sorcerer" will most
unceremoniously obtain control over any mind, and subject it entirely to
his evil powers.  BUT OUR MASTERS WILL NEVER DO THAT.  THEY HAVE NO
RIGHT, EXCEPT BY FALLING INTO BLACK MAGIC, TO OBTAIN FULL MASTERY OVER
ANYONE'S IMMORTAL EGO, AND CAN THEREFORE ACT ONLY ON THE PHYSICAL AND
PSYCHIC NATURE OF THE SUBJECT, LEAVING THEREBY THE FREE WILL OF THE
LATTER WHOLLY UNDISTURBED.  Hence, unless A PERSON HAS BEEN BROUGHT INTO
PSYCHIC RELATIONSHIP WITH THE MASTERS, AND IS ASSISTED BY VIRTUE OF HIS
FULL FAITH IN,  AND DEVOTION TO, HIS TEACHERS, THE LATTER, WHENEVER
TRANSMITTING THEIR THOUGHTS TO ONE WITH WHOM THESE CONDITIONS ARE NOT
FULFILLED, EXPERIENCE GREAT DIFFICULTIES IN PENETRATING INTO THE CLOUDY
CHAOS OF THAT PERSON'S SPHERE.  But this is no place to treat of a
subject of this nature.  SUFFICE IT TO SAY, THAT IF THE POWER EXISTS
THEN THERE ARE INTELLIGENCES (EMBODIED OR DISEMBODIED)  WHICH GUIDE THIS
POWER, AND LIVING CONSCIOUS INSTRUMENTS THROUGH WHOM IT IS TRANSMITTED
AND BY WHOM IT IS RECEIVED. We have only to beware of black magic.
ENQ.	But what do you really mean by "black magic" ?
THEO.	Simply abuse of psychic powers, or of any secret of nature ; the
fact of applying to selfish and sinful ends the powers of Occultism.  A
hypnotiser, who, taking advantage of his powers of  "suggestion," forces
a subject to steal or murder, would be called a black magician by us.
The famous "rejuvenating system"  of Dr. Brown-Sequard, of Paris,
through a loathsome animal injection into human blood-a discovery all
the medical papers of Europe are now discussing-if true,  is unconscious
black magic.
ENQ.	But this is mediæval belief in witchcraft and sorcery !  Even Law
itself has ceased to believe in such things ?
THEO.	So much the worse for law, as it has been led,  through such a
lack of discrimination, into committing more than one judiciary mistake
and crime.  It is the term alone that frightens you with its
"superstitious" ring in it.  Would not law punish an abuse of hypnotic
powers, as I just mentioned ?  Nay, it has so punished it already in
France and Germany ;  yet it would indignantly deny that it applied
punishment to a crime of evident sorcery. You cannot believe in the
efficacy and reality of the powers of suggestion by physicians and
mesmerisers ( or hypnotisers ), and then refuse to believe in the same
powers when used for evil motives.  And if you do, then you believe in
Sorcery.  You can- not believe in good and disbelieve in evil, accept
genuine money and refuse to credit such a thing as false coin.  Nothing
can exist without its contrast, and no day, no light, no good could have
any representation as such in your consciousness, were there no night,
darkness nor evil to offset and contrast them.
ENQ.	Indeed, I have known men, who, while thoroughly believing in that
which you call great psychic, or magic powers, laughed at the very
mention of Witchcraft and Sorcery.
THEO.	What does it prove ?  Simply that they are illogical.  So much the
worse for them again.  And we, knowing AS WE DO OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOOD
AND HOLY ADEPTS, BELIEVE AS THOROUGHLY IN THE EXISTENCE OF BAD AND
UNHOLY ADEPTS, OR-DUGPAS.
ENQ.	But if the Masters exist, why don't they come out before all men
and refute once for all the many charges which are made against Mdme.
Blavatsky and the Society ?
THEO.	What charges ?
ENQ.	THAT THEY DO NOT EXIST, AND THAT SHE HAS INVENTED THEM.  That they
are men of straw, "Mahatmas of muslin and bladders."  Does not all this
injure her reputation ?
THEO.	In what way can such an accusation injure her in reality ?  Did
she ever make money on their presumed existence, or derive benefit, or
fame, therefrom ?  I ANSWER THAT SHE HAS GAINED ONLY INSULTS, ABUSE, AND
CALUMNIES, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY PAINFUL HAD SHE NOT LEARNED LONG
AGO TO REMAIN PERFECTLY INDIFFERENT TO SUCH FALSE CHARGES.  For what
does it amount to,  after all ?  Why, TO AN IMPLIED COMPLIMENT, WHICH,
IF THE FOOLS, HER ACCUSERS, WERE NOT CARRIED AWAY BY THEIR BLIND HATRED
THEY WOULD HAVE THOUGHT TWICE BEFORE UTTERING.  TO SAY THAT SHE HAS
INVENTED THE MASTERS COMES TO THIS :  SHE MUST HAVE INVENTED EVERY BIT
OF PHILOSOPHY THAT HAS EVER BEEN GIVEN OUT IN THEOSOPHICAL LITERATURE.
SHE MUST BE THE AUTHOR OF THE LETTERS FROM WHICH "ESOTERIC BUDDHISM" WAS
WRITTEN ;  THE SOLE INVENTOR OF EVERY TENET FOUND IN THE "SECRET
DOCTRINE," WHICH, IF THE WORLD WERE JUST, WOULD BE RECOGNISED AS
SUPPLYING MANY OF THE MISSING LINKS OF SCIENCE, AS WILL BE, DISCOVERED A
HUNDRED YEARS HENCE.  BY SAYING WHAT THEY DO, THEY ARE ALSO GIVING HER
THE CREDIT OF BEING FAR CLEVERER THAN THE HUNDREDS OF MEN,  (MANY VERY
CLEVER AND NOT A FEW SCIENTIFIC MEN,) WHO BELIEVE IN WHAT SHE
SAYS-INASMUCH AS SHE MUST HAVE FOOLED THEM ALL !  IF THEY SPEAK THE
TRUTH, THEN SHE MUST BE SEVERAL MAHATMAS ROLLED INTO ONE like a nest of
Chinese boxes ; since among the SO-CALLED "MAHATMA LETTERS" ARE MANY IN
TOTALLY DIFFERENT AND DISTINCT STYLES, ALL OF WHICH HER ACCUSERS DECLARE
THAT SHE HAS WRITTEN.
ENQ.	It is just what they say.  BUT IS IT NOT VERY PAINFUL TO HER TO BE
PUBLICLY DENOUNCED AS "THE MOST ACCOMPLISHED IMPOSTOR OF THE AGE, whose
name deserves to pass to posterity," as is done in the Report of the
"Society for Psychical Research" ?
THEO.	It might be painful if it were true, or came from people less
rabidly materialistic and prejudiced.  As it is, PERSONALLY SHE TREATS
THE WHOLE MATTER WITH CONTEMPT, WHILE THE MAHATMAS SIMPLY LAUGH AT IT.
IN TRUTH, IT IS THE GREATEST COMPLIMENT THAT COULD BE PAID TO HER. I SAY
SO, AGAIN.
ENQ.	But her enemies claim to have proved their case.
THEO.	Aye, it is easy enough to make such a claim when you have
constituted yourself judge, jury, and prosecuting counsel at once, as
they did.  But who, except their direct followers and our enemies,
believe in it ?
ENQ.	But they sent a representative to India to investigate the matter,
didn't they ?
THEO.	They did, and their final conclusion rests entirely on the
unchecked statements and unverified assertions of this young gentleman.
A lawyer who read through his report told a friend of mine that in all
his experience he had never seen "such a ridiculous and
self-condemnatory document."  It was found to be full of suppositions
and "working hypotheses" which mutually destroyed each other.  Is this a
serious charge ?
ENQ.	Yet it has done the Society a great harm.  Why,  then, did she not
vindicate her own character, at least, before a Court of Law ?
THEO.	Firstly, because as a Theosophist, it IS HER DUTY TO LEAVE
UNHEEDED ALL PERSONAL INSULTS.  Secondly, because neither the Society
nor Mdme. Blavatsky had any money to waste over such a law-suit.  And
lastly, because it would have been ridiculous for both to be untrue to
their principles, because of an attack made on them by a flock of stupid
old British wethers, who had been led to butt at them by an over
frolicsome lambkin from Australia.
ENQ.	This is complimentary.  But do you not think that it would have
done real good to the cause of Theosophy, if she had authoritatively
disproved the whole thing once for all ?
THEO.	Perhaps.  But do you believe that any English jury or judge would
have ever admitted the reality of psychic phenomena, even if entirely
unprejudiced beforehand ?  And when you remember that they would have
been set against us already by the  "Russian Spy" scare, the charge of
Atheism and infidelity, and all the other calumnies that have been
circulated against us, you cannot fail to see that such an attempt to
obtain justice in a Court of Law would have been worse than fruitless !
All this the Psychic Researchers knew well, and they took a base and
mean advantage of their position to raise themselves above our heads and
save themselves at our expense.
ENQ.	The S. P. R. Now denies completely the existence of  the Mahatmas.
They say that from beginning to end they were a romance which Madame
Blavatsky has woven from her own brain ?
THEO.	Well, she might have done many things less clever than this.  At
any rate, we have not the slightest objection to this theory.  AS SHE
ALWAYS SAYS NOW, SHE ALMOST PREFERS THAT PEOPLE SHOULD NOT BELIEVE IN
THE MASTERS.  SHE DECLARES OPENLY THAT SHE WOULD RATHER PEOPLE SHOULD
SERIOUSLY THINK THAT THE ONLY MAHATMALAND IS THE GREY MATTER OF HER
BRAIN, AND THAT, IN SHORT,  SHE HAS EVOLVED THEM OUT OF THE DEPTHS OF
HER OWN INNER CONSCIOUSNESS THAN THAT THEIR NAMES AND GRAND IDEAL SHOULD
BE SO INFAMOUSLY DESECRATED AS THEY ARE AT PRESENT.  AT FIRST SHE USED
TO PROTEST INDIGNANTLY AGAINST ANY DOUBTS AS TO THEIR EXISTENCE.  NOW
SHE NEVER GOES OUT OF HER WAY TO PROVE OR DISPROVE IT. LET PEOPLE THINK
WHAT THEY LIKE.
ENQ.	But, of course, these Masters do exist ?
THEO.	WE AFFIRM THEY DO.  Nevertheless, this does not help much.  Many
people, even some Theosophists and ex-Theosophists, say that they have
never had any proof of their existence.  Very well ;  then Mme.
Blavatsky replies with this alternative : - IF SHE HAS INVENTED THEM,
THEN SHE HAS ALSO INVENTED THEIR PHILOSOPHY AND THE PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE
WHICH SOME FEW HAVE ACQUIRED ;  AND IF SO, WHAT DOES IT MATTER WHETHER
THEY DO EXIST OR NOT, SINCE SHE HERSELF IS HERE, AND HER OWN EXISTENCE,
AT ANY RATE, CAN HARDLY BE DENIED ?  IF THE KNOWLEDGE SUPPOSED TO HAVE
BEEN IMPARTED BY THEM IS GOOD INTRINSICALLY, AND IT IS ACCEPTED AS SUCH
BY MANY PERSONS OF MORE THAN AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE, WHY SHOULD THERE BE
SUCH A HULLABALOO MADE OVER THAT QUESTION ?  The fact of her being an
impostor has never been proved, and will always remain sub judice ;
whereas it is a certain and UNDENIABLE FACT THAT, BY WHOMSOEVER
INVENTED, THE PHILOSOPHY PREACHED BY THE "MASTERS"  IS ONE OF THE
GRANDEST AND MOST BENEFICENT PHILOSOPHIES ONCE IT IS PROPERLY
UNDERSTOOD.  Thus the slanderers,  while moved by the lowest and meanest
feeling-those of hatred, revenge, malice, wounded vanity, or
disappointed ambition, - seem quite unaware that they are paying the
greatest tribute to her intellectual powers.  So be it, if the poor
fools will have it so.  REALLY, MME. BLAVATSKY HAS NOT THE SLIGHTEST
OBJECTION TO BEING REPRESENTED BY HER ENEMIES AS A TRIPLE ADEPT,  AND A
"MAHATMA" TO BOOT.  IT IS ONLY HER UNWILLINGNESS TO POSE IN HER OWN
SIGHT AS A CROW PARADING IN PEACOCK'S FEATHERS THAT COMPELS HER TO THIS
DAY TO INSIST UPON THE TRUTH.
ENQ.   But if you have such wise and good men to guide the Society, how
is it that so many mistakes have been made ?
THEO.   THE MASTERS DO NOT GUIDE THE SOCIETY, NOT EVEN THE FOUNDERS ;
and no one has ever asserted that they did :   they only WATCH OVER, AND
PROTECT IT.  This is amply proved by the fact that no mistakes have been
able to cripple it, and no scandals from within, nor the most damaging
attacks from without, have been able to overthrow it.  The Masters look
at the future, not at the present, and every mistake is so much more
accumulated wisdom for days to come.  The other "Master who sent the man
with the five talents did not tell him how to double them, nor did he
prevent the foolish servant from burying his one talent in the earth.
Each must acquire wisdom by his own experience and merits. The Christian
Churches, who claim a far higher  "Master," the very Holy Ghost itself,
have ever been and are still guilty not only of "mistakes," but of a
series of bloody crimes throughout the ages.  Yet, no Christian would
deny, for all that, his belief in that  "Master," I suppose ?  although
his existence is far more hypothetical than that of the Mahatmas ;  as
no one has ever seen the Holy Ghost, and his guidance of the Church,
moreover, their own ecclesiastical history distinctly contradicts.
Errare humanum est.  Let us return to our subject.

          THE  ABUSE  OF  SACRED  NAMES  AND  TERMS.

ENQ.    Then, what I have heard, namely, that many of your Theosophical
writers claim to have been inspired by these Masters, or to have seen
and conversed with them, is not true ?
THEO.   It may or it may not be true.  How can I tell ?  The burden of
proof rests with them.  Some of them, a few-very few, indeed-have
distinctly either lied or were hallucinated when boasting of such
inspiration ; OTHERS WERE TRULY INSPIRED BY GREAT ADEPTS.  THE TREE IS
KNOWN BY ITS FRUITS ;  and as all Theosophists have to be judged by
their deeds and not by what they write or say, SO ALL THEOSOPHICAL BOOKS
MUST BE ACCEPTED ON THEIR MERITS, AND NOT ACCORDING TO ANY CLAIM TO
AUTHORITY WHICH THEY MAY PUT FORWARD.
ENQ.   But would MDME. BLAVATSKY APPLY THIS TO HER OWN WORKS-THE SECRET
DOCTRINE, FOR INSTANCE ?
THEO.   CERTAINLY ;  SHE SAYS EXPRESSLY IN THE PREFACE THAT SHE GIVES
OUT THE DOCTRINES THAT SHE HAS LEARNT FROM  THE MASTERS, but claims no
inspiration whatever for what she has lately written.  As for our best
Theosophists, THEY WOULD ALSO IN THIS CASE FAR RATHER THAT THE NAMES OF
THE MASTERS HAD NEVER BEEN MIXED UP WITH OUR BOOKS IN ANY WAY.  With few
exceptions, most of such works are not only imperfect, but positively
erroneous and misleading.  GREAT ARE THE DESECRATIONS TO WHICH THE NAME
OF TWO OF THE MASTERS HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED.  There is hardly a medium who
has not claimed to have seen them.  Every bogus swindling Society,  for
commercial purposes, now claims to be guided and directed by "Masters,"
often supposed to be far higher than ours !  Many and heavy are the sins
of those who advanced these claims, prompted either by desire for lucre,
vanity, or irresponsible mediumship.  Many persons have been plundered
of their money by such societies, which offer to sell the secrets of
power, knowledge, and spiritual truth for worthless gold.  WORST OF ALL,
THE SACRED NAMES OF OCCULTISM AND THE HOLY KEEPERS THEREOF HAVE BEEN
DRAGGED IN THIS FILTHY MIRE, POLLUTED BY BEING ASSOCIATED WITH SORDID
MOTIVES AND IMMORAL PRACTICES, WHILE THOUSANDS OF MEN HAVE BEEN HELD
BACK FROM THE PATH OF TRUTH AND LIGHT THROUGH THE DISCREDIT AND EVIL
REPORT WHICH SUCH SHAMS, SWINDLES, AND FRAUDS HAVE BROUGHT UPON THE
WHOLE SUBJECT. I SAY AGAIN,  EVERY EARNEST THEOSOPHISTS REGRETS TO-DAY,
FROM THE BOTTOM OF HIS HEART, THAT THESE SACRED NAMES AND THINGS HAVE
EVER BEEN MENTIONED BEFORE THE PUBLIC, AND FERVENTLY WISHES THAT THEY
HAD BEEN KEPT SECRET WITHIN A SMALL CIRCLE OF TRUSTED AND DEVOTED
FRIENDS.
ENQ.  The names certainly do occur very frequently now-a-days, and I
never remember hearing of such persons as "Masters" till quite recently.
THEO.  It is so ;  and HAD WE ACTED ON THE WISE PRINCIPLE OF SILENCE,
INSTEAD OF RUSHING INTO NOTORIETY AND PUBLISHING ALL WE KNEW AND HEARD,
SUCH DESECRATION WOULD NEVER HAVE OCCURRED.  BEHOLD, ONLY FOURTEEN YEARS
AGO, BEFORE THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY WAS FOUNDED, ALL THE TALK WAS OF
"SPIRITS."  THEY WERE EVERYWHERE, IN EVERYONE'S MOUTH ; AND NO ONE BY
ANY CHANCE EVEN DREAMT OF TALKING ABOUT LIVING "ADEPTS,"  "MAHATMAS," OR
"MASTERS."  ONE HARDLY HEARD EVEN THE NAME OF THE ROSICRUCIANS, WHILE
THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH A THING AS "OCCULTISM" WAS SUSPECTED EVEN BUT BY
VERY FEW.  NOW ALL THAT IS CHANGED.  WE THEOSOPHISTS WERE,
UNFORTUNATELY, THE FIRST TO TALK OF THESE THINGS, TO MAKE THE FACT OF
THE EXISTENCE IN THE EAST OF "ADEPTS"  AND "MASTERS" AND OCCULT
KNOWLEDGE KNOWN ;  AND NOW THE NAME HAS BECOME COMMON PROPERTY.  IT IS
ON US, NOW, THAT THE KARMA, THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE RESULTING
DESECRATION OF HOLY NAMES AND THINGS, HAS FALLEN.  ALL THAT YOU NOW FIND
ABOUT SUCH MATTERS IN CURRENT LITERATURE-AND THERE IS NOT A LITTLE OF
IT-ALL IS TO BE TRACED BACK TO THE IMPULSE GIVEN IN THIS DIRECTION BY
THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY AND ITS FOUNDERS.  Our enemies profit to this
day by our mistake.  The most recent book directed against our teachings
is alleged to have been written by an Adept of twenty years' standing.
Now, it is a palpable lie.  We know the amanuensis and his inspirers (as
he is himself too ignorant to have written anything of the sort ).
These  "inspirers" are living persons, revengeful and unscrupulous in
proportion to their intellectual powers ;  and these bogus Adepts are
not one, but several.  The cycle of "Adepts,"  used as sledge-hammers to
break the theosophical heads with, began twelve years ago,  with Mrs.
Emma Hardinge Britten's "Louis" of Art Magic and Ghost-Land, and now
ends with the "Adept"  and "Author" of The Light of Egypt, a work
written by Spiritualists against Theosophy and its teachings.  BUT IT IS
USELESS TO GRIEVE OVER WHAT IS DONE, AND WE CAN ONLY SUFFER IN THE HOPE
THAT OUR INDISCRETIONS MAY HAVE MADE IT A LITTLE EASIER FOR OTHERS TO
FIND THE WAY TO THESE MASTERS, WHOSE NAMES ARE NOW EVERYWHERE TAKEN IN
VAIN, AND UNDER COVER OF WHICH SO MANY INIQUITIES HAVE ALREADY BEEN
PERPETRATED.
ENQ.  Do you reject "Louise" as an Adept ?
THEO.  WE DENOUNCE NO ONE, LEAVING THIS NOBLE TASK TO OUR ENEMIES.  The
spiritualistic author of Art Magic,  etc., may or may not have been
acquainted with such an Adept-and saying this, I say far less than what
that lady has said and written about us and Theosophy for the last
several years-that is her own business.  Only when, in a solemn scene of
mystic vision, an alleged  "Adept" sees "spirits" presumably at
Greenwich England, through Lord Rosse's telescope, which was built in,
and never moved from Parsonstown, Ireland, * I may well be permitted to
wonder at the ignorance of that "Adept" in matters of science.  This
beats all the mistakes and blunder committed at times by the chelas of
our Teachers !  And it is this "Adept"  that is used now to break the
teachings of our masters!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
  *  Vide "Ghost Land," Part I., p. 133, et seq.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
ENQ.   I quite understand your feeling in this matter, and think it only
natural.  And now, in view of all that you have said and explained to
me, there is one subject on which I should like to ask you a few
questions.
THEO.   If I can answer them I will.  What is that ?  [Next chapter]
END
--------------------------
Once HPB, herself has copitalized the word "NATURE" -this is not my
capitalization.   In a few places HPB has italied titles of books, and a
few other things, which I have not been able to do, because my e-mail
does not take italics.  I hope I have made no typographical mistakes to
inconvenience and delude readers.  Please, correct any mistakes found in
future communications to Theos-talk.           Sophia