Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00186)

Mahatma Letter No. 134
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-134.htm

[Letter from H.P. Blavatsky to A.P. Sinnett. This letter includes a 
message from Master Morya.]

Dehra Dun. Friday. 4th. 

Arrived only yesterday, last night late from Saharampur. The house 
very good but cold, damp and dreary. Received a whole heap of letters 
and answer yours first. 

Saw at last M. and showed him your last or rather Benemadhab's on 
which you have scratched a query. It is the latter Morya answers. I 
wrote this under his dictation and now copy it. 

I wrote to Sinnett my opinion on the Allahabad theosophists. (Not 
through me though?) Adetyarom B. wrote a foolish letter to Damodar 
and Benemadhab writes a foolish request to Mr. Sinnett. Because K.H. 
chose to correspond with two men, who proved of the utmost importance 
and use to the Society they all -- whether wise or stupid, clever or 
dull, possibly useful or utterly useless -- lay their claims to 
correspond with us directly -- too. Tell him (you) that this must be 
stopped. For ages we never corresponded with anyone, nor do we mean 
to. What has Benemadhab or any other of the many claimants done to 
have a right to such a claim? Nothing whatever. They join the 
Society, and though remaining as stubborn as ever in their old 
beliefs and superstitions, and having never given up caste or one 
single of their customs, they, in their selfish exclusiveness, expect 
to see and converse with us and have our help in all and everything. 
I will be pleased if Mr. Sinnett says, to everyone of those who may 
address him with similar pretensions the following: "The 'Brothers' 
desire me to inform one and all of you, natives, that unless a man is 
prepared to become a thorough theosophist i.e. to do as D. Mavalankar 
did, -- give up entirely caste, his old superstitions and show 
himself a true reformer (especially in the case of child marriage) he 
will remain simply a member of the Society with no hope whatever of 
ever hearing from us. The Society, acting in this directly in 
accordance with our orders, forces no one to become a theosophist of 
the IId. Section. It is left with himself and at his choice. It is 
useless for a member to argue 'I am one of a pure life, I am a 
teetotaller and an abstainer from meat and vice. All my aspirations 
are for good etc.' and he, at the same time, building by his acts and 
deeds an impassable barrier on the road between himself and us. What 
have we, the disciples of the true Arhats, of esoteric Buddhism and 
of Sang-gyas to do with the Shasters and Orthodox Brahmanism? There 
are 100 of thousands of Fakirs, Sannyasis and Saddhus leading the 
most pure lives, and yet being as they are, on the path of error, 
never having had an opportunity to meet, see or even hear of us. 
Their forefathers have driven away the followers of the only true 
philosophy upon earth away from India and now, it is not for the 
latter to come to them but to them to come to us if they want us. 
Which of them is ready to become a Buddhist, a Nastika as they call 
us? None. Those who have believed and followed us have had their 
reward. Mr. Sinnett and Hume are exceptions. Their beliefs are no 
barrier to us for they have none. They may have had influences around 
them, bad magnetic emanations the result of drink, Society and 
promiscuous physical associations (resulting even from shaking hands 
with impure men) but all this is physical and material impediments 
which with a little effort we could counteract and even clear away 
without much detriment to ourselves. Not so with the magnetism and 
invisible results proceeding from erroneous and sincere beliefs. 
Faith in the Gods and God, and other superstitions attracts millions 
of foreign influences, living entities and powerful agents around 
them, with which we would have to use more than ordinary exercise of 
power to drive them away. We do not choose to do so. We do not find 
it either necessary or profitable to lose our time waging war to the 
unprogressed Planetaries who delight in personating gods and 
sometimes well known characters who have lived on earth. There are 
Dhyan-Chohans and "Chohans of Darkness," not what they term devils 
but imperfect "Intelligences" who have never been born on this or any 
other earth or sphere no more than the "Dhyan Chohans" have and who 
will never belong to the "builders of the Universe," the pure 
Planetary Intelligences, who preside at every Manvantara while the 
Dark Chohans preside at the Pralayas. Explain this to Mr. Sinnett (I 
CAN'T) -- tell him to read over what I said to them in the few things 
I have explained to Mr. Hume; and let him remember that as all in 
this universe is contrast (I cannot translate it better) so the light 
of the Dhyan Chohans and their pure intelligence is contrasted by 
the "Ma-Mo Chohans" -- and their destructive intelligence. These are 
the gods the Hindus and Christians and Mahomed and all others of 
bigoted religions and sects worship; and so long as their influence 
is upon their devotees we would no more think of associating with or 
counteracting them in their work than we do the Red-Caps on earth 
whose evil results we try to palliate but whose work we have no right 
to meddle with so long as they do not cross our path. (You will not 
understand this, I suppose. But think well over it and you will. M. 
means here, that they have no right or even power to go against the 
natural or that work which is prescribed to each class of beings or 
existing things by the law of nature. The Brothers, for instance 
could prolong life but they could not destroy death, not even for 
themselves. They can to a degree palliate evil and relieve suffering; 
they could not destroy evil. No more can the Dhyan Chohans impede the 
work of the Mamo Chohans, for their Law is darkness, ignorance, 
destruction etc., as that of the former is Light, knowledge and 
creation. The Dhyan Chohans answer to Buddh, Divine Wisdom and Life 
in blissful knowledge, and the Ma-mos are the personification in 
nature of Shiva, Jehovah and other invented monsters with Ignorance 
at their tail). 

The last phrase of M.'s I translate is thus. Tell him (you) then that 
for the sake of those who desire to learn and have information, I am 
ready to answer the 2 or 3 enquiries of Beninadhab from the Shasters, 
but I will enter in no correspondence with him or any other. Let him 
put their questions clearly and distinctly to (you) Mr. Sinnett, and 
then I will answer through him (you)." 

------- 

I send you my uncle's letter just received by me. He says (as my 
translation of his Russian letter shows) that he wrote to you the 
same. Whether you received it or not, I know not, but I send you 
this. If it is identical with yours then send me back mine. I suppose 
that by this time it is pretty well proved that I am I -- and not 
someone else; that my uncle being now adjunct (or asst.) Minister of 
the Interior, is a personage who by signing his name in full can 
certainly be trusted, unless, indeed, the C. and M. and your friend 
Primrose invent a new version and say that we have forged the 
documents. But my uncle says in his official letter to me that the 
Prince Dondovhof is going to send me an official document to prove my 
identity, and so we will wait. His other private letter I cannot 
translate as its phraseology is far from complimentary for Mr. 
Primrose in particular, and the Anglo-Indians who insult and vilify 
me in general. I will ask the Prince to write to Lord Ripon, or 
Gladstone direct. 

Your's in the love of Jesus 

H. P. Blavatsky. 

Why the deuce does the "Boss" want me now to go to Allahabad? I can't 
be spending money there and back for I have to go by Jeypur and 
Baroda and he knows it. What all this means is more than I can tell. 
He made me go to Lahore and now it's Allahabad!!