In September 1887, H.P.B.
Examines the Work in
The USA and the Perspectives
After Her Departure
Helena P. Blavatsky
Helena Blavatsky in Maycott, in 1887
A 2011 Editorial Note:
The present material includes three letters. The first one is dated September 15, 1887.
Judge is authorized by H.P.B. to show it to Elliott Coues, if he wants. The second letter, written in the same day, is
Private to Judge. The third letter consists of a brief open message
addressed to North-American theosophists, and its date is September 27, 1887.
We reproduce these texts from “Theosophical
History” magazine, volume V, Number 6, April 1995, pp. 204-207. The originals are part of the Blavatsky Letters collection in the Andover-Harvard
Divinity School Library.
As in previous letters, it
is clear in these texts that H.P.B. was aware of the fact that the future of
the theosophical movement would depend into a great extent upon the work done
in the United States. History has shown
her perception was right. After H.P.B.’s death, it was mainly in the U.S.A.
that the original teachings were preserved. From that country they were
promulgated again around the world in the 20th century; and this took place
precisely on the basis of William Judge’s work. Although outer events did not
turn out as envisioned by H.P.B. in the present correspondence, the general
result was in accordance with the viewpoint expressed by her.
While referring to William
Judge and Elliott Coues, H.P.B. writes:
“Begin by being elected both of you for a
year, and then if you are prepared to pledge yourselves both for life -
then affairs & events may be turned off by unseen powers into such a groove
that you will be unanimously elected for life - just as Olcott & I were -
to go on with the work after our deaths. Do you understand what it means? It
means that unless you consent, you will force me to a miserable life
& a miserable death with the idea preying on my mind that there is
an end of theosophy.”
In the above words, H.P.B.
clearly implies that the preservation of theosophy, as a teaching, would depend
on Judge’s work. She then refers to some of the difficulties her Monad would
have to face in its next birth, should the theosophical movement abandon after
her death the original teachings of theosophy.
She says:
“That for several years I will not be able to
help it on & stir its course, because I will have to act in a body which
will have to be assimilated to the nirmanakaya; because even in Occultism there are such
things as a failure, & a retardment, and a misfit.”
In a previous letter to Judge, H.P.B. had discussed the process of “blending”
between part of a disciple’s consciousness and that of a nirmanakaya.[1]
Should the movement fail after H.P.B.’s death, in the next birth of her monad
the new “individual” would have to remain for some time “assimilated to the
nirmanakaya”, before being able to confront the actual vibrations resulting
from the short term defeat of H.P.B.’s effort for mankind. Therefore H.P.B. foresees
in this 1887 letter that she may have a “miserable death” in case the movement did
not get to good and safe hands before she had to depart.
When she died in May 1891, the problem was not solved in her mind, for
in her last words before dying she made this vehement and personal
appeal:
“Isabel, Isabel
keep the link unbroken; do not let my last incarnation be a failure”. [2]
At this point, the actual meaning of the words last incarnation
and failure should be calmly investigated.
No incarnation can be described as a failure or otherwise simply on
the basis of its outward results in the world.
The degree of success or failure of her incarnation as “HPB” could not
be influenced, and much less determined, by the fact that her students would,
or would not, preserve the occult link after her departure. The need to “keep
the link unbroken” was most important, though, for the next incarnation
of the same teacher.
It was supposed that the same monad which worked as “H.P.B.” in the 19th century would come back soon. It would then have to face those same skandhas left
by H.P.B. at the inner and vital substance of the movement. The teaching was
septenary. It included several levels of skandhas which should be carefully
preserved for future use. Such a link should be kept alive. The words “last
incarnation” meant therefore HPB’s next incarnation, which she expected
to be her last, before adeptship. H.P.B. probably needed no more than
one lifetime before attaining liberation from the wheel of samsara.
A few years after H.P.B.’s death, W.Q. Judge wrote:
“H.P. Blavatsky has clearly pointed out (….) that the plan is to keep
the T.S. alive as an active, free, unsectarian body during all the time of
waiting for the next great messenger, who will be herself beyond question.”[3]
Judge probably knew what he was saying in the above
lines. For him, the 19th century lifetime as “H.P.B.” would not be the last one
of that monad, and the movement should be loyal to the original teaching until
the same monad would return.
Yet - why exactly did H.P.B. think there could be some
sort of “failure” in the next incarnation of her Monad? She was an Initiate. She had a powerful
experience, much good karma, and accumulated strength.
The danger was in that, since for karmic reasons the
reincarnation would take place in a short time, the soul could not easily face
the tremendously powerful skandhas of its previous life. Such skandhas did not quite
belong to “HPB”. They were created
having H.P.B.’s body as a tool or vehicle.
Those skandhas - and their karma of frontally challenging human
organized ignorance - were the result of the Masters’ actions in cooperation
with H.P.B., and were much too powerful to be successfully faced by her Monad
in the following incarnation, without some sort of support. The skandhas and
the karma involved would overwhelm the soul in question, at least for some
time, if the movement would attach itself to illusions and fail to help the new
individual. A direct outer help from
Masters would be naturally out of the question since the time of their direct
intervention was 1875-1900.
Thus the groups and associations which remain loyal to
the original teachings are and will be necessary to provide a basis for any
true Initiate soul or Messenger who comes to the Movement. Such an individual
must have an “umbrella”, a refuge from which to be able to face not only his
own skandhas, but the skandhas of the movement, seen as a vehicle and tool for
the dawning of a much stronger buddhi-manasic sub-principle in our
mankind.
The substance of H.P.B.’s soul and its karma are not
personal: they are not even individual. They are deeply blended with the karma and
the “living energy” of the theosophical effort. Referring to the movement, she
said:
“It has my magnetic fluid…” [4]
If the movement could not “keep the link unbroken”,
preferring instead to imitate Roman Catholic rituals and to adopt
pseudo-theosophy while abandoning Ethics, it would be difficult for the re-born
Monad to use its own skandhas mixed to the “magnetic fluid” of the distorted
movement. Such an event would make it
necessary for an “assimilation to the nirmanakaya” to occur during at least
part of the incarnation. It would also reduce the actual possibilities of
interaction between the individual and the movement, as long as it remained
widely dominated by pseudo-esotericism and senseless ritualisms. Then her “last
incarnation” could be “a failure” as she told Isabel Cooper-Oakley. [5]
On Silence From Masters
The opening lines in the first of the following
letters reveal an important aspect of the relationship between a master and a
disciple, and indicate one of the reasons for the frequently long periods of
silence on the part of a master, as recorded in various parts of the original
teachings.
In the second and private letter, H.P.B. refers to
Judge’s limitations when he tries to “sense” the Master’s thoughts. She writes:
“You say you do ‘feel Master’ in this. Well my dear fellow your intuition
is at fault then.”
On Saying Fibs And the Use of Dissimulation
In the private letter to
Judge, H.P.B. writes:
“I am ready to say any fib on lay
principles, but I cannot say a lie when Master is concerned.”
This must be examined.
A “fib” is a minor lie, a
falsehood of small importance, relating to outer aspects of life. It sometimes
has to be used in order to protect somebody, or something sacred, from great
harm. If during the Second World War a Nazi military officer in occupied Paris
asked a citizen who had Jewish friends if he knew any Jews and where they
lived, it would be correct, and necessary, to tell a fib and say:
“No, I don’t”.
In real theosophy, secrecy
and dissimulation are not used for the purpose of personal benefit, or for the
defense of outer institutions and bureaucratic corporations. They are
acceptable, however, when strictly necessary for the defense of sacred truths
or human life.
On the use of dissimulation
in order to protect sacred truths, it is worthwhile to see the example of the
Druses as examined in Laurence Oliphant’s book “The Land of Gilead” (chapter
XIII, pp. 347-348 of the 1880 edition.)
The motive makes the
difference with Karma Law, and theosophy is a philosophy of truth and
self-sacrifice. The famous 1900 letter from a Master explained that misleading
secrecy is a fatal mistake in theosophy and leads to destruction. While harmless dissimulation is permissible
in outer aspects when necessary, truthfulness in the philosophical debate and
utter sincerity as to the teaching is a rule with no exception.
Maycott, H.P.B.’s cottage in
London
In the following texts, underlined words are thus in the original.
Sometimes, they are underlined with a double line in the transcription made by
Mr. Michael Gomes. We don’t take that into consideration. A word between square
brackets is an attempt by the transcriber to understand the original
handwriting.
The first letter is dated from “Maycot”. Sylvia Cranston writes: “On May
1, 1887, HPB left Ostend for London. Her destination was a small cottage called
Maycott in Upper Norwood, which became the center for Theosophical activities
for several months before larger quarters were acquired.” [6]
We add explanatory notes to the text.
(Carlos Cardoso Aveline)
NOTES:
[1] See “Letters
Between Blavatsky and Judge-6”.
[2] “Faces of Friends”,
an article dedicated to Isabel Cooper-Oakley at “The Path” magazine, July 1894
edition, p. 124.
[3] “The Closing Cycle”,
a text in “Theosophical Articles”, by W. Q. Judge, Theosophy Company, Los
Angeles, 1980, vol. II, p. 153. The same
article is in the book “The Heart Doctrine”, W.Q. Judge, Theosophy
Co., Bombay, India, 1977, p. 40.
[4] “Theosophical Articles”, H. P. Blavatsky, Theosophy Co., Los Angeles, 1981, three
volumes, volume I, p. 120. See also the book “H. P. Blavatsky, a Great
Betrayal”, by Alice Cleather, Thacker, Spink & Co., Calcutta, India, 1922,
96 pp., p. 2.
[5] Another possibility is that the rebirth of
such a Monad would be postponed for another century or two, until the movement
could be ready and karmically deserve further teachings.
[6] “HPB - The Extraordinary Life and Influence
of Helena Blavatsky, Founder of the Modern Theosophical Movement”, Sylvia
Cranston, a Jeremy P. Tarcher / Putnam Book, published by G.P. Putnam’s Sons,
New York, Copyright 1993, 648 pp., see p. 322. H.P.B. spells the word “Maycot”,
with one “t”, Cranston uses “Maycott” with two “tt”.
Letters Between Blavatsky and Judge - 11
Helena P. Blavatsky
Maycot. Sept.
15/87
My dear W.Q.J.
Either I meddled up things writing one thing & thinking
another or you misunderstood me. Master has suggested, as you say,
not ordered (for He “orders” no longer since the unveiling of every
prominent theosophist’s character has commenced) - & therefore ordered (me alone) to telegraph
to you both [1] & ask you are
you ready, or willing, or prepared to be elected for life. This does not
mean that you should be elected right away & to begin with. The change of
front would be too ludicrous & absurd. But it means just what I telegraphed
to you.
Begin by being elected both
of you for a year, and then if you are prepared to pledge yourselves both
for life - then affairs & events may be turned off by unseen powers
into such a groove that you will be unanimously elected for life - just as
Olcott & I were - to go on with the work after our deaths. Do you
understand what it means? It means that unless you consent, you will force me to
a miserable life & a miserable death with the idea preying on my
mind that there is an end of theosophy. That for several years I will not be
able to help it on & stir its course, because I will have to act in a body
which will have to be assimilated to the nirmanakaya; because even in
Occultism there are such things as a failure, & a retardment, and a misfit.
But you don’t understand me, I see.
Judge, try to. Whatever you do hurry
up, for you do not know what may come tomorrow. Nor do you know to read
peoples’ characters yet, behind a thick veil of maya. Those you have an affection
for, you will skip over their faults; those you have no love for, you
exaggerate their defects. It is only human & natural, my dear friend, but
it is not theosophical.
“Lucifer” [2] is sent to you; I do not like, or rather I am not so well
satisfied with the first no. I have tried to make it entirely different
from the Path & Theosophist, so as not to clash or hurt
either, and now the actual thing itself jars upon me.
Go to India until the English put me out? Until
the English put me in you mean. For this is what will happen if I go. C.O. [3]
is sure to side with the padris, and a lie against me is no sooner told
than it is believed. Thanks. I believe I am more useful here, in London free,
than at Adyar in prison as a Russian spy - on suspicion.
Yours ever & ever
H.P. Blavatsky
Do as you like. Do not ask my advice any more
for really I am ready to do anything you tell me, but I will advise you
nothing. Let Karma take its course.[4]
private
The letter just written you may or might show
to C. [5], therefore, I have written
nothing there that would prevent you to do so. But what I say there is gospel.
Master wants you to be elected for life, for reasons of his own, that’s
god’s truth. I cannot write to C. that it was a test since it was
not, but simply a question to which both of you answered. I am ready to say any
fib on lay principles, but I cannot say a lie when Master is
concerned. You say you do “feel Master” in this. Well my dear fellow your
intuition is at fault then. Less than you would I want to see him or anyone
else (save yourself) elected for life, but once it is in the programme
for future action & policy, I have but to submit, disagreeable
though it be for me personally. But if I do not like the idea, it is because I
trust no one any longer, save yourself & Olcott, perhaps. I have
lost my last faith in mankind & see & smell (rightly, if you please) Judases
everywhere.[6] But with you it is
different. You do not want him elected for life because you exaggerate
his evil tendencies; you dread his lying propensities, his “tricks” &
vindictiveness. Well, you are right only as far as the latter vice goes. He is
vindictive because he is proud, & if you make of him an enemy now
- you will have murdered theosophy in the U.S. with your own hands. Vindictive
he is, lying & tricky no. You do not know him. He is a
sensitive & a terrible one. He is more than a medium, for he
deceives not only his “sitters” & public but himself - which other
mediums do not. He is a self-hypnotic to the last degree. He is that so
much so, that while some of his “tricks” are apparent to you, they are truth
& fact for him. He is what Mahomet was, yet Mahomet founded a religion
which with all its faults is a 1000 times better than any except Buddhism. What
matters it to you his Karma if he obtains or creates good results for
theosophy? Coues is our last trump-card. If you lose him you & the Cause
will have lost their battle. I tell you so. It is our Waterloo. Olcott is too
weak though firm in appearance.
The whole plan that “upset” you, the “plan for
life” is a consequence of his getting married to Mrs. Bates. That woman
is an angel, & my best friend among the she-females. She will be his salvation.
The man is profoundly miserable in his hurt pride, & because people have
never understood him rightly. He hates & despises the world, because it
pelted him with mud for 20 years when he had not deserved it. He has of
the traditional “fallen angel” in him & I repeat again - Judge, you do not
understand the man. Let him be elected for a year & then - see. But
whatever you do for mercy sake, for the sake of [the] Masters, your own and
the sake of the Cause, do not become enemies again. I feel profoundly desperate
& miserable and you made me so. I had no thought of the thing; I had given
up all idea when I heard that a political entente was going on between
you two. I was warned. Then came your joint letters from Washington.
Then Master ordered me to telegraph, I did, as told & now it upsets you!!
My dearest friend you cannot make a theosophist
according to your heart of him. But you can make an excellent weapon, a charmed
“Thor’s hammer” with which you may become Thor the invincible against the
“Frost giants” of the malicious, wicked materialistic world. We must either do
the best we can out of available material at hand or - shut up shop at once.
Amen.
And now may the Masters enlighten you.
Yours
[7]
London W.
17 Landsdowne Road.
(Holland Park)
Sept. 27, 1887.
To the Theosophists of the
United States
and the American Theosophical
Council
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
The Convention held April 1887, in the United
States having left open the appointment or office of President - by order of
the Secret Council of the Holy Brotherhood which appointed me & conferred upon
me my original powers as Founder of the Society, I do hereby, in virtue of
those powers appoint Dr. Elliot Coues, President of the Gnostic Theosophical
Society, Washington, D.C. to be President of the American Theosophical Council from
this date until the next regular convention & direct my Co-founder, W.Q.
Judge, General Secretary in America to notify all Branches of this appointment.
The President will uphold & carry out the present Constitution of April 1887.
Fraternally yours
H.P. Blavatsky
By order of the Secret Council
NOTES:
[1] “you both”- that is, William Judge and
Elliot Coues.
[2] “Lucifer” magazine,
whose first number appeared with the date of September 15, 1887. The word “Lucifer” means “light-bringer”. It
is an ancient name for the planet Venus, the “morning star”. Since the Middle
Ages, the word has been distorted by Catholic priests.
[3] Mr. Cooper-Oakley.
[4] Thus ends the first letter. The next word is
written in another sheet of paper.
[5] “C.” - Coues.
[6] H.P.B. worked with complete truthfulness,
while trying to defend truth from treason. By a natural projection mechanism
she “expected too much from people” - and got disappointed. Her nervous system
was adapted to work in high levels of direct perception and sincerity. She
experienced great suffering while seeing the reality behind the masks often
used by people in social life. Such a contrast was part of her own training as
a disciple. Disappointment brought a lesson in detachment and stimulated a
better understanding of the concept of Maya.
[7] - The signature
with such a triangle means that H.P.B. sends the letter in her official
capacity as an initiated disciple, or “by orders” of her Master, or with his
approval. It can also imply a combination of these three factors.
- The signature
with such a triangle means that H.P.B. sends the letter in her official
capacity as an initiated disciple, or “by orders” of her Master, or with his
approval. It can also imply a combination of these three factors.
000
On the role of the esoteric movement in the
ethical awakening of mankind during the 21st century, see the book “The Fire and Light of Theosophical Literature”, by
Carlos Cardoso Aveline.
Published in
2013 by The Aquarian Theosophist,
the volume has 255 pages and can be obtained through Amazon Books.
000
