Mahatma Letter No. 132: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
[[Category:ML from HPB]] | [[Category:ML from HPB]] | ||
'''This is Letter No. 135 in Barker numbering.''' See below for [[Mahatma Letter No. 132#Context and background|Context and background]]. | |||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
<br> | <br> | ||
<big>[[Mahatma Letter No. 131|'''<nowiki> < </nowiki>'''Prev letter chrono]]</big>{{pad|3em}} | <big>[[Mahatma Letter No. 131|'''<nowiki> < </nowiki>'''Prev letter chrono]]</big>{{pad|3em}} |
Revision as of 03:28, 16 April 2012
This is Letter No. 135 in Barker numbering. See below for Context and background.
< Prev letter chrono
Next letter chrono >
< Prev letter Barker
Next letter Barker >
Page 1 transcription, image, and notes
My dear Mr. Sinnett, For fear that you should "trace back" to me a new treachery, permit me to say that I have never said to Hubbe Schleiden and Frank Gebhard that the existence of our seven objective planets was an allegory. What I said was, that the objectivity and actuality of the septenary chain had nothing to do with the correct understanding of the seven rounds. That outside of the initiates no one knew the mot final of this |
NOTES:
|
Page 2
mystery. That you could not understand it thoroughly, nor explain it, because Mahat K.H. told you hundred times that you could not be told the whole doctrine; that you knew Hume had made him questions and cross-examined Him until his hair became grey. That there were hundred apparent inconsistencies just because you had not the key to the x777x and could not be given it. In short that you gave the truth, but by far not the whole truth especially about rounds and rings which was only at best allegorical. Yours, H.P.B. |
NOTES: |
Context and background
Physical description of letter
Publication history
Commentary about this letter
Notes