Theos-Talk Archives (November 2008 Message tt00447)

The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett

    Theosophical University Press Edition 

Letter No. 59

    Received London about July, 1883. 

With whatever shortcomings my always indulgent "lay-chela" may have 
to charge me, he will, it appears, credit me with having given him a 
new source of enjoyment. For even the sombre prophecy of Sir Charles 
Turner (a recent obscuration of his) that you would fall into Roman 
Catholicism as the inevitable outcome of your dabbling in Theosophy 
and believing in the "K.H." maya -- has not dampened the ardour of 
your propaganda in the gay world of London. If this zeal should be 
cited by the Altruist of Rothney, in support of his declaration that 
your grey vesicles are surcharged with Tzigadze Akasa, it will still 
doubtless be balm to your wounded feelings to know that you are 
essentially aiding to build the bridge over which the British 
metaphysicians may come within thinking distance of us!

It is the custom among some good people to glance back at their 
life's path from the hillocks of time they annually surmount. So, if 
my hope has not betrayed me you must have been mentally comparing 
your present "greatest pleasure" and "constant occupation" with that 
which was so in the olden time, when you threaded the streets of your 
metropolis, where the houses are as if "painted in Indian ink," and a 
day's sunshine is an event to remember. You have measured yourself 
against yourself, and found the Theosophist an "Anak" morally, as 
compared with the "old man" (the beau valseur);is it not so? Well, 
this is, perhaps, your reward -- the beginning of it: the end you 
will realize in Devachan, when "floating along" in the circurnambient 
ether, instead of the circummuded British Channel -- foggy though 
that state may now appear to your mind's eye. Then only will you "see 
thyself by thyself" and learn the true meaning of Atmanam, atmana 
pasya: --

    "To know itself e'en as a shining light 

    Requires no light to make itself perceived . . ." 

of the great Vedanta Philosophy.

Again and once more, an attempt has been made to dispel some of that 
great mist that I find in Mr. Massey's Devachan. It will appear as a 
contribution to the August number of the Theosophist, and to that I 
shall refer Mr. Massey and yourself. Quite possibly even then the 
"obscuration" will not be removed and it may be thought that the 
intended explanation is nothing of the kind; and that, instead of 
winding the clock, a clumsy hand has but broken out some cogs. This 
is our misfortune, and I doubt if we shall ever get quite free of 
these obscurities and alleged contradictions; since there is no way 
to bring the askers and respondents face to face. Still at the worst 
it must be conceded that there is some satisfaction in the fact that 
there is now a ford across this river and you are building spans for 
a royal bridge. It is quite right that you should baptize your new 
brain-babe with the waters of Hope; and, within the limits of 
possibility that by it "a further and very sensible impulse will be 
imparted to the present movement." But, friend, even the "green 
cheese" of the shining moon is periodically lunched upon by Rahu; so 
do not think yourself altogether above the contingency of popular 
fickleness, that would put out your light in favour of some new man's 
"farthing dip." The culture of Society more often inclines to lawn-
tennis philosophy than to that of the banned "adepts," whose wider 
game has worlds for balls, and etheric space for its shaven lawn. 
Theplat of your first book was spiced with phenomena to tickle the 
spiritualistic palate: this second one is a dish of cold philosophy, 
and in your "large section of London Society" you will scarcely find 
enough of the wine of sympathy to wash it down. Many, who now think 
you mildly mad will buy the book to find out if a commission De 
lunatico should issue to prevent your doing more damage; but of all 
your readers few are likely to follow your lead towards our ashrum. 
Still the theosophist's duty is like that of the husbandman; to turn 
his furrows and sow his grains as best he can: the issue is with 
nature, and she, the slave of Law.

I shall waste no condolences upon the poor "lay-chelas" because of 
the "delicate weapons they can alone work with." A sorry day it would 
be for mankind if any sharper or deadlier ones were put in their 
unaccustomed hands! Ah! you would concur with me, my faithful friend, 
if you could but see the plaint one of them has just made on account 
of the agonizing results of the poisoned weapons he got the wielding 
of, in an evil hour, through the help of a sorcerer. Crushed morally, 
by his own selfish impetuosity; rotting physically from diseases 
engendered by the animal gratifications he snatched with "demon" 
help; behind him a black memory of wasted chances and hellish 
successes; before him a pall of dark despair, -- of avitchi, -- this 
wretched man turns his impotent rage against our "starry science" and 
ourselves, and hurls his ineffectual curses at those he vainly 
besieged for more powers in chelaship, and whom he deserted for a 
necromantic "Guru" who now leaves the victim to his fate. Be 
satisfied, friend, with your "delicate weapons"; if not as lethal as 
the discus of Vishnu, they can break down many barriers if plied with 
power. The poor wretch in question confesses to a course of "lies, 
breaches of faith, hatreds, temptings or misleading of others, 
injustices, calumnies, perjuries, false pretences," etc. The "risk" 
he "voluntarily took," but he adds, "if they (we) had been good and 
kind as well as wise and powerful, they (we) would have certainly 
prevented me from undertaking a task to which they knew I was 
unequal." In a word, we, who have gained our knowledge, such as it 
is, by the only practicable method, and who have no right to hinder 
any fellow man from making the attempt (though we have the right to 
warn, and we do warn every candidate), we are expected to take upon 
our own heads the penalty of such interference, or try to save 
ourselves from the same by making incompetents into adepts in spite 
of themselves! Because we did not do this, he is "left to linger out 
a wretched existence as an animated poison bag, full of mental, 
moral, and physical corruption." This man has, in despair, turned 
from a "heathen" an atheist and a free-thinker -- a Christian, or 
rather a theist, and now humbly "submits" to Him (an extra cosmical 
God for whom he has even discovered a local) and to all delegated by 
Him with lawful authority." And we, poor creatures, are "traitors, 
Liars, Devils, and all my (his) crimes (as enumerated above) are as a 
shining robe of glory compared to Theirs:" -- his capitals and 
underscorings being quoted as well as his words! Now friend, put away 
that thought that I ought not to compare your cage with his, for I do 
not. I have only given you a glimpse into the hell of this lost soul, 
to show you what disaster may come upon the "lay-chela" who snatches 
at forbidden power before his moral nature is developed to the point 
of fitness for its exercise. You must think well over the article 
"Chelas and Lay Chelas" which you will find in the Supplement of the 
July Theosophist.

So the great Mr. Crookes has placed one foot across the threshold for 
the sake of reading the Society's papers? Well and wisely done, and 
really brave of him. Heretofore he was bold enough to take a similar 
step and loyal enough to truth to disappoint his colleagues by making 
his facts public. When he was seeing his invaluable paper smothered 
in the "Sections" and the whole Royal Society trying to cough him 
down, metaphorically if not actually, as its sister Society in 
America did to that martyr, Hare -- he little thought how perfect a 
revenge Karma had in store for him. Let him know that its cornucopia 
is not yet emptied, and that Western Science has still three 
additional states of matter to discover. But be should not wait for 
us to condense ourselves up to the stethescopic standard as his Katy 
did; for we men are subject to laws of molecular affinity and polaric 
attraction which that sweet simulacrum was not hampered with. We have 
no favourites, break no rules. If Mr. Crookes would penetrate Arcana 
beyond the corridors the tools of modern science have already 
excavated, let him -- Try. He tried and found the Radiometer; tried 
again, and found Radiant matter; may try again and find the "Kama-
rupa" of matter -- its fifth state. But to find it's Manas he would 
have to pledge himself stronger to secrecy than he seems inclined to. 
You know our motto, and that its practical application has erased the 
word "impossible" from the occultist's vocabulary. If he wearies not 
of trying, he may discover that that most noble of all facts, his 
true SELF. But he will have to penetrate many strata before he comes 
to It. And to begin with let him rid himself of the maya that any man 
living can set up "claims" upon Adepts. He may create irresistible 
attractions and compel their attention, but they will be spiritual, 
not mental or intellectual. And this bit of advice applies and is 
directed to several British theosophists, and it may be well for them 
to know it. Once separated from the common influences of Society, 
nothing draws us to any outsider save his evolving spirituality. He 
may be a Bacon or an Aristotle in knowledge, and still not even make 
his current felt a feather's weight by us, if his power is confined 
to the Manas. The supreme energy resides in the Buddhi; latent -- 
when wedded to Atman alone, active and irresistible when galvanized 
by the essence of "Manas" and when none of the dross of the latter 
commingles with that pure essence to weigh it down by its finite 
nature. Manas, pure and simple, is of a lower degree, and of the 
earth earthly: and so your greatest men count but as nonentities in 
the arena where greatness is measured by the standard of spiritual 
development. When the ancient founders of your philosophical schools 
came East, to acquire the lore of our predecessors, they filed no 
claims, except the single one of a sincere and unselfish hunger for 
the truth. If any now aspire to found new schools of science and 
philosophy the same plan will win -- if the seekers have in them the 
elements of success.

Yes; you are right about the Society for Psychic Research: its work 
is of a kind to tell upon public opinion by experimentally 
demonstrating the elementary phases of Occult Science. H. S. Olcott 
has been trying to convert each of the Indian Branches into such a 
school of research, but the capacity for sustained independent study 
for knowledge's sake is lacking, and must be developed. The success 
of the S.P.R. will greatly aid in this direction and we wish it well.

I also go with you in your views as to the choice of the new 
President of the B.T.S.; in fact I concurred, I believe, before the 
choice was made.

There is no reason why you should not "attempt mesmeric cures" by the 
help not of your locket but the power of your own will. Without this 
latter in energetic function, no locket will do much good. The hair 
in it is in itself but an "accumulator" of the energy of him, who 
grew it, and can no more cure of itself than stored electricity can 
turn a wheel until liberated and conducted to the objective point. 
Set your will in motion and you at once draw upon the person upon 
whose head it (the hair not the will) grew, through the psychic 
current which ever runs between himself and his severed tress. To 
heal diseases it is not indispensable, however desirable, that the 
psychopathist should be absolutely pure; there are many in Europe and 
elsewhere who are not. If the healing be done under the impulse of 
perfect benevolence, unmixed with any latent selfishness, the 
philanthropist sets up a current which runs like a fine thrill 
through the sixth condition of matter, and is felt by him whom you 
summon to your help, if not at that moment engaged in some work which 
compels him to be repellent to all extraneous influences. The 
possession of a lock of any adept's hair is of course a decided 
advantage, as a better tempered sword is to the soldier in battle; 
but the measure of its actual help to the psychopathist will be in 
ratio with the degree of will power he excites in himself, and the 
degree of psychic purity in his motive. The talisman and his Buddhi 
are in sympathy.

Now that you are at the centre of modern Buddhistic exegesis, in 
personal relations with some of the clever commentators (from whom 
the holy Devas deliver us!) I shall draw your attention to a few 
things which are really as discreditable to the perceptions of even 
non-initiates, as they are misleading to the general public. The more 
one reads such speculations as those of Messrs. Rhys Davids, Lillie, 
etc. -- the less can one bring himself to believe that the 
unregenerate Western mind can ever get at the core of our abstruse 
doctrines. Yet hopeless as their cases may be, it would appear well 
worth the trouble of testing the intuitions of your London members -- 
of some of them, at any rate -- by half expounding through you one or 
two mysteries and leaving them to complete the chain themselves. 
Shall we take Mr. Rhys Davids as our first subject, and show that 
indirectly as he has done it yet it is himself who strengthened the 
absurd ideas of Mr. Lillie, who fancies to have proved belief in a 
personal God in ancient Buddhism. Mr. Rhys Davids' "Buddhism" is full 
of the sparkle of our most important esotericism; but always, as it 
would seem, beyond not only his reach but apparently even his powers 
of intellectual perception. To avoid "absurd metaphysics" and its 
inventions, he creates unnecessary difficulties and falls headlong 
into inextricable confusion. He is like the Cape Settlers who lived 
over diamond mines without suspecting it. I shall only instance the 
definition of "Avalokitesvara" on p.p. 202 and 203. There, we find 
the author saying that which to any occultist seems a palpable 
absurdity: --

"The name Avalokitesvara, which means 'the Lord who looks down from 
on high,' is a purely metaphysical invention. The curious use of the 
past particle passive 'avalokita' in an active sense is clearly 
evident from the translations into Tibetan and Chinese."

Now saying that it means: "the Lord who looks down from on high," or, 
as he kindly explains further -- "the Spirit of the Buddhas present 
in the church," is to completely reverse the sense. It is equivalent 
to saving "Mr. Sinnett looks down from on high (his Fragments of 
Occult Truth) on the British Theos. Society," whereas it is the 
latter that looks up to Mr. Sinnett, or rather to his Fragments as 
the (in their case only possible) expression and culmination of the 
knowledge sought for. This is no idle simile and defines the exact 
situation. In short, 

*** on page 338:Avalokita Isvar literally interpreted means "the Lord 
that is seen." "Iswara" implying moreover, rather the adjective than 
the noun, lordly, self-existent lordliness, not Lord. It is, when 
correctly interpreted, in one sense "the divine Self perceived or 
seen by Self," the Atman or seventh principle ridded of its mayavic 
distinction from its Universal Source -- which becomes the object of 
perception for, and by the individuality centred in Buddhi, the sixth 
principle, -- something that happens only in the highest state of 
Samadhi. 

 This applying it to the microcosm. ***

***In the other sense Avalokitesvara implies the seventh Universal 
Principle, as the object perceived by the Universal Buddhi "Mind" or 
Intelligence which is the synthetic aggregation of all the Dhyan 
Chohans, as of all other intelligences whether great or small, that 
ever were, are, or will be. Nor is it the "Spirit of Buddhas present 
in the Church," but the Omnipresent Universal Spirit in the temple of 
nature -- in one case; and the seventh Principle -- the Atman in the 
temple -- man -- in the other. Mr. Rhys Davids might have, at least 
remembered, the (to him) familiar simile made by the Christian Adept, 
the Kabalistic Paul: "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and 
that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you" -- and thus avoided to have 
made a mess of the name. Though as a grammarian he detected the use 
of the "past particle passive" yet he shows himself far from an 
inspired "Panini" in overlooking the true cause and saving his 
grammar by raising the hue and cry against metaphysics. And yet, he 
quotes Beale's [Beal] Catena as his authority, for the invention, 
when, in truth, this work is perhaps the only one in English that 
gives an approximately correct explanation of the word, at any rate, 
on page 374. "Self-manifested" -- How? it is asked. "Speech or Vach 
was regarded as the Son or the manifestation of the Eternal Self, and 
was adored under the name of Avalokitesvara, the manifested God." 
This shows as clearly as can be -- that Avalokitesvara is both the 
unmanifested Father and the manifested Son, the latter proceeding 
from, and identical with, the other; -- namely,

*** page 339

 Parabrahm and Jivatman, the Universal and the individualized seventh 
Principle, -- the Passive and the Active, the latter the Word, Logos, 
the Verb. Call it by whatever name, only let these unfortunate, 
deluded Christians know that the real Christ of every Christian is 
the Vach, the "mystical Voice," while the man Jeshu was but a mortal 
like any of us, an adept more by his inherent purity and ignorance of 
real Evil, than by what he had learned with his initiated Rabbis and 
the already (at that period) fast degenerating Egyptian Hierophants 
and priests. A great mistake is also made by Beale [Beal] who says: 
"this name (Avalokiteswara) in Chinese took the form of Kwan-Shai-
yin, and the divinity worshipped under that name (was) generally 
regarded as a female." (374) Kwan-shai-yin -- or the universally 
manifested voice "is active -- male; and must not be confounded with 
Kwan-vin, or Buddhi the Spiritual Soul (the sixth Pr.) and the 
vehicle of its "Lord." It is Kwan-yin that is the female principle or 
the manifested passive, manifesting itself "to every creature in the 
universe, in order to deliver all men from the consequences of sin" 
-- as rendered by Beale, [Beal] this once quite correctly (383), 
while Kwan-shai-vin, the "Son identical with his Father" is the 
absolute activity, hence -- having no direct relation to objects of 
sense is -- Passivity.

What a common ruse it is of your Aristoteleans! with the sleuth 
hound's persistence they track an idea to the very verge of the 
"impassable chasm," and then brought to bay leave the metaphysicians 
to take up the trail if they can, or let it be lost. It is but 
natural that a Christian theologian, a missionary, should act upon 
this line, since -- as easily perceived even in the little I gave out 
just now -- a too correct rendering of our Avalokitesvara and Kwan-
Shai-Yin might have very disastrous effects. It would simply amount 
to showing Christendom, the true and undeniable origin of the "awful 
and incomprehensible" mysteries of its Trinity, Transubstantiation, 
Immaculate conception, as also whence their ideas of the Father, Son, 
Spiritus and -- Mother. It is less easy to shuffle al piaccere the 
cards of Buddhistic chronology than those of Chrishna and Christ. 
They cannot place -- however much they would -- the birth of our Lord 
Sangyas Buddha A.D. as they have contrived to place that of Chrishna. 
But why should an atheist and a materialist like Mr. Rhys Davids so 
avoid the correct rendering of our dogmas -- even when he happens to 
understand them, -- which does not happen every day -- is something 
surpassingly curious! In this instance the blind and guilty Rhys 
Davids leads the blind and innocent Mr. Lillie into the ditch; where 
the latter catching at the proffered straw rejoices in the idea that 
Buddhism teaches in reality -- a personal God!!

Does your B.T.S. know the meaning of the white and black interlaced 
triangles, of the Parent Society's seal that it has also adopted? 
Shall I explain? -- the double triangle viewed by the Jewish 
Kabalists as Solomon's Seal, is, as many of you doubtless know the 
Sri-antara of the archaic Aryan Temple, the "mystery of Mysteries," a 
geometrical synthesis of the whole occult doctrine. The two 
interlaced triangles are the Buddhangums of Creation. They contain 
the "squaring of the circle," the "philosophical stone," the great 
problems of Life and Death, and -- the Mystery of Evil. The chela who 
can explain this sign from every one of its aspects -- is virtually 
an adept. How is it then that the only one among you, who has come so 
near to unravelling the mystery is also the only one who got none of 
her ideas from books? Unconsciously she gives out -- to him who has 
the key -- the first syllable of the Ineffable name! Of course you 
know that the double-triangle -- the Satkiri Chakram of Vishnu -- or 
the six-pointed star, is the perfect seven. In all the old Sanskrit 
works -- Vedic and Tantrik -- you find the number 6 mentioned more 
often than the 7 -- this last figure, the central point being 
implied, for it is the germ of the six and their matrix. It is then 
thus . . . [At this point in the original there is a rough drawing of 
the interlaced triangles inscribed in a circle. -- ED.] -- the 
central point standing for seventh, and the circle, the Mahakasha -- 
endless space -- for the seventh Universal Principle. In one sense, 
both are viewed as Avalokitesvara, for they are respectively the 
Macrocosm and the microcosm. The interlaced triangles -- the upper 
pointing one -- is Wisdom concealed, and the downward pointing one -- 
Wisdom revealed (in the phenomenal world). The circle indicates the 
bounding, circumscribing quality of the All, the Universal Principle 
which, from any given point expands so as to embrace all things, 
while embodying the potentiality of every action in the Cosmos. As 
the point then is the centre round which the circle is traced -- they 
are identical and one, and though from the standpoint of Maya and 
Avidya -- (illusion and ignorance) -- one is separated from the other 
by the manifested triangle, the 3 sides of which represent the three 
gunas -- finite attributes. In symbology the central point is Jivatma 
(the 7th principle), and hence Avalokitesvara, the Kwan-Shai-yin, the 
manifested "Voice" (or Logos), the germ point of manifested activity; 
-- hence -- in the phraseology of the Christian Kabalists "the Son of 
the Father and Mother," and agreeably to ours -- "the Self manifested 
in Self -- Yih-sin, the "one form of existence," the child of 
Dharmakaya (the universally diffused Essence), both male and female. 
Parabrahm or "Adi-Buddha" while acting through that germ point 
outwardly as an active force, reacts from the circumference inwardly 
as the Supreme but latent Potency. The double triangles symbolize the 
Great Passive and the Great Active; the male and female; Purusha and 
Prakriti. Each triangle is a Trinity because presenting a triple 
aspect. The white represents in its straight lines: Gnanam -- 
(Knowledge); Gnata -- (the Knower); and Gnayam -- (that which is 
known). The black-form, colour, and substance, also the creative, 
preservative, and destructive forces and are mutually correlating, 
etc., etc.

Well may you admire and more should you wonder at the marvellous 
lucidity of that remarkable seeress, who ignorant of Sanskrit or 
Pali, and thus shut out from their metaphysical treasures, has yet 
seen a great light shining from behind the dark bills of exoteric 
religions. How, think you, did the "Writers of the Perfect Way" come 
to know that Adonai was the Son and not the Father; or that the third 
Person of the Christian Trinity is -- female? Verily, they lay in 
that work several times their hands upon the keystone of Occultism. 
Only does the lady -- who persists using without an explanation the 
misleading term "God" in her writings -- know how nearly she comes up 
to our doctrine when saying: -- "Having for Father, Spirit which is 
Life (the endless Circle or Parabrahm) and for Mother the Great Deep, 
which is Substance (Prakriti in its undifferentiated condition) -- 
Adonai possesses the potency of both and wields the dual powers of 
all things." We would say triple, but in the sense as given this will 
do. Pythagoras had a reason for never using the finite, useless 
figure -- 2, and for altogether discarding it. The ONE, can, when 
manifesting, become only 3. The unmanifested when a simple duality 
remains passive and concealed. The dual monad (the 7th and 6th 
principles) has, in order to manifest itself as a Logos, the "Kwan-
shai-yin" to first become a triad (7th, 6th and half of the 5th); 
then, on the bosom of the "Great Deep" attracting within itself the 
One Circle -- form out of it the perfect Square, thus "squaring the 
circle" -- the greatest of all the mysteries, friend -- and 
inscribing within the latter the -- WORD (the Ineffable name) -- 
otherwise the duality could never tarry as such, and would have to be 
reabsorbed into the ONE. The "Deep" is Space -- both male and female. 
"Purush (as Brahma) breathes in the Eternity: when 'he' in-breathes 
-- Prakriti (as manifested Substance) disappears in his bosom; when 
'he' out-breathes she reappears as Maya," says the Sloka. The One 
reality is Mulaprakriti (undifferentiated Substance) -- the "Rootless 
root," the. . . But we have to stop, lest there should remain but 
little to tell for your own intuitions.

Well may the Geometer of the R.S. not know that the apparent 
absurdity of attempting to square the circle covers a mystery 
ineffable. It would hardly be found among the foundation stones of 
Mr. Roden Noel's speculations upon the "pneumatical body . . . of our 
Lord," nor among the debris of Mr. Farmer's "A New Basis of Belief in 
Immortality"; and to many such metaphysical minds it would be worse 
than useless to divulge the fact, that the Unmanifested Circle -- the 
Father, or Absolute Life -- is non-existent outside the Triangle and 
Perfect Square, and -- is only manifested in the Son; and that it is 
when, reversing the action and returning to its absolute state of 
Unity, and the square expands once more into the Circle -- that "the 
Son returns to the bosom of the Father." There it remains until 
called back by his Mother -- the "Great Deep," to remanifest as a 
triad -- the Son partaking at once, of the Essence of the Father, and 
of that of the Mother -- the active Substance, Prakriti in its 
differentiated condition. "My Mother -- (Sophia -- the manifested 
Wisdom) took me" -- says Jesus in a Gnostic treatise; and he asks his 
disciples to tarry till he comes. . . . The true "Word" may only be 
found by tracing the mystery of the passage inward and outward of the 
Eternal Life, through the states typified in these three geometric 
figures.

The criticism of "A Student of Occultism" (whose wits are sharpened 
by the mountain air of his home) and the answer of "S.T.K. . . . 
Chary" (June Theosophist) upon a part of your annular and circular 
expositions need not annoy or disturb in any way your philosophic 
calm. As our Pondichery chela significantly says, neither you nor any 
other man across the threshold has had or ever will have the 
"complete theory" of Evolution taught him; or get it unless he 
guesses it for himself. If anyone can unravel it from such tangled 
threads as are given him, very well; and a fine proof it would indeed 
be of his or her spiritual insight. Some -- have come very near it. 
But yet there is always with the best of them just enough error, -- 
colouring and misconception; the shadow of Manas projecting across 
the field of Buddhi -- to prove the eternal law that only the 
unshackled Spirit shall see the things of the Spirit without a veil. 
No untaught amateur could ever rival the proficient in this branch of 
research; yet the world's real Revelators have been few, and its 
pseudo-Saviours legion; and fortunate it is if their half-glimpses of 
the light are not, like Islam, enforced at the sword's point, or like 
Christian Theology, amid blazing faggots and in torture chambers. 
Your Fragments contain some -- still very few errors, due solely to 
your two preceptors of Adyar, one of whom would not, and the other 
could not tell you all. The rest could not be called mistakes -- 
rather incomplete explanations. These are due, partly to your own 
imperfect education in your last theme -- I mean the ever-threatening 
obscurations -- partly to the poor vehicles of language at our 
disposal, and in part again, to the reserve imposed upon us by rule. 
Yet, all things considered, they are few and trivial; while as to 
those noticed by "A Student, etc." (the Marcus Aurelius of Simla) in 
your No. VII, it will be pleasant for you to know that every one of 
them, however now seeming to you contradictory, can (and if it should 
seem necessary shall) be easily reconciled with facts. The trouble is 
that (a) you cannot be given the real figures and difference in the 
Rounds, and (b) that you do not open doors enough for explorers. The 
bright Luminary of the B.T.S. and the Intelligences that surround her 
(embodied I mean) may help you to see the flaws: at all events Try. 
"Nothing was ever lost by trying." You share with all beginners the 
tendency to draw too absolutely strong inferences from partly caught 
hints, and to dogmatize thereupon as though the last word had been 
spoken. You will correct this in due time. You may misunderstand us, 
are more than likely to do so, for our language must always be more 
or less that of parable and suggestion, when treading upon forbidden 
ground; we have our own peculiar modes of expression and what lies 
behind the fence of words is even more important than what you read. 
But still -- TRY. Perhaps if Mr. S. Moses could know just what was 
meant by what was said to him, and about his Intelligences, he would 
find all strictly true. As he is a man of interior growth, his day 
may come and his reconciliation with "the Occultists" be complete. 
Who knows?

Meanwhile, I shall, with your permission, close this first volume.

K. H. 


***
Here is more clear to what Avalokita Isvar literally interpreted means
the divine self perceived or seen by Self, the Atman or 7th principle 
ridded of its mayavic distinction from its universal Source-which 
becomes the object of perception for, and by the individuality 
centred in Buddhi, the 6th principle, something that happens only in 
the highest state of Samadhi.

This letter is a vision on microcosmos.So it is not easy to 
understand if they use the same name in different associations, but 
if one read all, it is clear.