Masonic, Occult and Esoteric Online Library
The Mahatma Letters to A.P. Sinnett - 1923
By A. T. Barker
Letter No CXXXIV
Dehru 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 use and importance 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 cor- responded with anyone, nor do we mean to. What has Benemadhab or any other of the 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 pre-pared to become a thoroug^h theosophist i.e. to do as D.Mavalankar did, —give up entirely caste, his old superstitions andshow himself a true reformer (especially in the case of child marriage) he will remain simply a member of the Society withnohope whatever of ever hearing from us. The Society, actinginthis directly in accordance with our orders, forces no one to becomea theosophist of the lid. Section. It is left with himself andathis choice. It is useless for a member to argue ' I am one ofapure 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 roadbetween himself and us. What have we, the disciples of the trueArhats, of esoteric Buddhism and of Sang-gyas to do with theShasters and Orthodox Brahmanism? There are lOO of thousands of Fakirs, Sannyasis and Saddhus leading the most purelives, and yet being as they arej on the path of error, neverhaving had an opportunity to meet, see or even hear of us. Theirforefathers have driven away the followers of the only truephilosophy upon earth away from India and now, it is not for thelatter to come to them but to them to come to us if they wantus.Which of them is ready to become a Buddhist, a Nastika as theycall us? None. Those who have believed and followed us havehad their reward. Mr. Sinnett and Hume are exceptions. Theirbeliefs are no barrier to us for they have none. They mayhavehad influences around them, had magnetic emanations the resultof drink. Society and promiscuous physical associations (resultingeven from shaking hands with impure men) but all this is physicaland material impediments which with a little effort we couldcounteract and even clear away without much detriment to ourselves. Not so with the magnetism and invisible results prc^-ceeding from erroneous and sincere beliefs. Faith in the Godsand God, and other superstitions attracts millions of foreign influ-ences, living entities and powerful agents around them, withwhich we would have to use more than ordinary exercise of powerto drive them away. We do not choose to do so. Wedonotfind it either necessary or profitable to lose our time wagingwarto the unprogressed Planetaries who delight in personating godsand sometimes well known characters who have lived on earth.There are Dhyan-Chohans and " Chohans of Darkness," not whatthey term devils but imperfect *' Intelligences " who have neverbeen born on this or any other earth or sphere no more thanthe** Dhyan Chohans" have and who will never belong to the** builders of the Universe," the pure Planetary Intelligences, whopreside at every Manvantara while the Dark Chohans presideatthe Pralayas. Explain this to Mr. Sinnett (I can't)—tell himto read over what I said 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 " Mo-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 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 BM^d/i-Divine Wisdom and Life, in blissful knowledge, and the Ma-mos are the personification in nature of Shiva, Jehovah and other invented monsters with Ignor- ance 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 in- formation, 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 /—and not someone else ; that my uncle being now adjunct (or asst.) Minister of the Interior, is a personage who by saying 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 thePrince 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 Allaha-bad? I can't be spending money there and back for I have to goby Jeypur and Baroda and he knows it. What all this meansismore than I can tell. He made me go to Lahore and nowit'sAllahabad!!
