Mahatma Letter No. 128: Difference between revisions

From Theosophy Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
(9 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Category:ML from Koot Hoomi]]
[[Category:ML needs background]]
[[Category:ML needs publication history]]
[[Category:ML needs commentary]]
{{Infobox MLbox
{{Infobox MLbox
| header1 = People involved |
| header1 = People involved |
Line 11: Line 7:
| writtendate      = unknown
| writtendate      = unknown
| receiveddate      = Summer 1884
| receiveddate      = Summer 1884
| otherdate        = none
| otherdate        = unknown
| header3 = Places
| header3 = Places
| sentfrom          = unknown
| sentfrom          = unknown
| receivedat        = London  
| receivedat        = London  
| vialocation      = none
| vialocation      = unknown{{pad|9em}}
}}
}}
'''This is Letter No. 63 in Barker numbering.''' See below for [[Mahatma Letter No. 128#Context and background|Context and background]].
This is '''Letter No. 128''' in ''' [[The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett (book)|''The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett'']], 4th chronological edition'''. It corresponds to '''Letter No. 63''' in '''Barker numbering.''' See below for [[Mahatma Letter No. 128#Context and background|Context and background]].
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Line 55: Line 51:
Good friend —
Good friend —


When our first correspondence began, there was no idea then of any publications being issued on the basis of the replies you might receive. You went on putting questions at random, and the answers being given at different times to disjointed queries, and so to say, under a semi-protest, were necessarily imperfect, often from different standpoints. When the publication of some of these were permitted for the Occult World, it was hoped that among your readers some may be able, like yourself, to put all the different pieces together and evolve out of them the skeleton, or a shadow of our system, which, although not exactly the original — this would be an impossibility — would be as near an approach to it as could be made by a non-initiate. But the results have proved quasi-disastrous! We had tried an experiment and sadly failed! Now we see that none but those who have passed at least their third initiation are able to write upon those subjects comprehensively. A Herbert Spencer would have made a mess of it under your circumstances. Mohini is certainly not quite right, in some details he is positively wrong, but so are you my old friend, though the outside reader is none the wiser for it and no one, so far, has noticed the real vital errors in Esoteric Buddhism and Man; nor are they likely to. We can give no further information on the subject already approached by you and have to leave the facts already communicated to be woven into a consistent and systematic philosophy by the
When our first correspondence began, there was no idea then of any publications being issued on the basis of the replies you might receive. You went on putting questions at random, and the answers being given at different times to disjointed queries, and so to say, under a semi-protest, were necessarily imperfect, often from different standpoints. When the publication of some of these were permitted for the [[The Occult World (book)|Occult World]], it was hoped that among your readers some may be able, like yourself, to put all the different pieces together and evolve out of them the skeleton, or a shadow of our system, which, although not exactly the original — this would be an impossibility — would be as near an approach to it as could be made by a [[Initiation|non-initiate]]. But the results have proved quasi-disastrous! We had tried an experiment and sadly failed! Now we see that none but those who have passed at least their [[Initiation#Third_Initiation|third initiation]] are able to write upon those subjects comprehensively. A [[Herbert Spencer]] would have made a mess of it under your circumstances. [[Mohini Mohun Chatterji|Mohini]] is certainly not quite right, in some details he is positively wrong, but so are you my old friend, though the outside reader is none the wiser for it and no one, so far, has noticed the real vital errors in [[Esoteric Buddhism (book)|Esoteric Buddhism]] and [[Man: Fragments of Forgotten History (book)|Man]]; nor are they likely to. We can give no further information on the subject already approached by you and have to leave the facts already communicated to be woven into a consistent and systematic philosophy by the


{{Col-break|width=3%}}
{{Col-break|width=3%}}
Line 73: Line 69:
{{Col-begin|width=98%}}
{{Col-begin|width=98%}}
{{Col-break|width=55%}}
{{Col-break|width=55%}}
chelas at the Headquarters. The Secret Doctrine will explain many things, set to right more than one perplexed student.
[[chela]]s at the [[Adyar (campus)|Headquarters]]. [[The Secret Doctrine (book)|The Secret Doctrine]] will explain many things, set to right more than one perplexed student.


Therefore, to put before the world all the crude and complicated materials in your possession in the shape of old letters, in which, I confess, much was purposely made obscure, would only be making confusion worst confounded. Instead of doing any good thereby to yourself and others it would only place you in a still more difficult position, bring criticism upon the heads of the "Masters" and thus have a retarding influence on human progress and the T.S. Hence I protest most strongly against your new idea. Leave to the Secret Doctrine the task of avenging you. My letters must not be published, in the manner you suggest, but on the contrary if you save Djual K. trouble copies of some should be sent to the Literary Committee at Adyar — about which Damodar has written to you — so that with the assistance of S.Y.K. Charya, Djual K., Subba Row and the Secret Committee (from which H.P.B. was purposely excluded by us to avoid new suspicions and calumnies) they might be able to utilise the information for the realization of the object with which the Committee was started, as explained by Damodar in the letter written by him under orders. It is neither new "Kiddle developments" that I seek to avoid, nor criticism directed against my personality, which indeed can hardly be reached; but I rather try to save yourself and Society from new troubles which would be serious
Therefore, to put before the world all the crude and complicated materials in your possession in the shape of old letters, in which, I confess, much was purposely made obscure, would only be making confusion worst confounded. Instead of doing any good thereby to yourself and others it would only place you in a still more difficult position, bring criticism upon the heads of the [[Masters of Wisdom|"Masters"]] and thus have a retarding influence on human progress and the [[Theosophical Society|T.S.]] Hence I protest most strongly against your new idea. Leave to the Secret Doctrine the task of avenging you. My letters must not be published, in the manner you suggest, but on the contrary if you save [[Djual Khool|Djual K]] trouble copies of some should be sent to the Literary Committee at [[Adyar (campus)|Adyar]] — about which [[Damodar K. Mavalankar|Damodar]] has written to you — so that with the assistance of [[S. T. Krishnama Charya|S. T. K. Charya]], Djual K., [[T. Subba Row|Subba Row]] and the Secret Committee (from which [[Helena Petrovna Blavatsky|H.P.B.]] was purposely excluded by us to avoid new suspicions and calumnies) they might be able to utilise the information for the realization of the object with which the Committee was started, as explained by Damodar in the letter written by him under orders. It is neither new "[[Henry Kiddle#The Kiddle Incident|Kiddle developments]]" that I seek to avoid, nor criticism directed against my personality, which indeed can hardly be reached; but I rather try to save yourself and Society from new troubles which would be serious


{{Col-break|width=3%}}
{{Col-break|width=3%}}
Line 93: Line 89:
{{Col-begin|width=98%}}
{{Col-begin|width=98%}}
{{Col-break|width=55%}}
{{Col-break|width=55%}}
this time. The letters, in short, were not written for publication or public comment upon them, but for private use, and neither M. nor I will ever give our consent to see them thus handled.
this time. The letters, in short, were not written for publication or public comment upon them, but for private use, and neither [[Morya|M.]] nor I will ever give our consent to see them thus handled.


As regards your first letter Dj.K. has been instructed to attend to it. In such delicate matters I am still less competent to give advice than to satisfy aspiring "chelas" of the "L.C.H." sort. I am afraid the "poor, dear Mrs. Holloway" is showing her white teeth and would hardly be found now "a charming companion." Under instructions Olcott wrote a letter to Finch — which gives the key to the little problem. It is Fern, Moorad Ali, Bishen Lal and other wrecks, over again. Why shall "would-be" chelas with such intense self personalities, force themselves within the enchanted and dangerous circle of probation! Pardoning my short letter, I am very busy just now with the coming new year.
As regards your first letter [[Djual Khool|Dj.K.]] has been instructed to attend to it. In such delicate matters I am still less competent to give advice than to satisfy aspiring "[[chela]]s" of the "[[Laura Holloway-Langford|L.C.H.]]" sort. I am afraid the "poor, dear [[Laura Holloway-Langford|Mrs. Holloway]]" is showing her white teeth and would hardly be found now "a charming companion". Under instructions [[Henry Steel Olcott|Olcott]] wrote a letter to [[G. B. Finch|Finch]] — which gives the key to the little problem. It is [[Edmond W. Fern|Fern]], [[Godolphin Mitford|Moorad Ali]], [[Bishen Lal]] and other wrecks, over again. Why shall "would-be" chelas with such intense self personalities, force themselves within the enchanted and dangerous circle of [[probation]]! Pardoning my short letter, I am very busy just now with the coming new year.


K. H.
[[Koot Hoomi|K. H.]]


{{Col-break|width=3%}}
{{Col-break|width=3%}}
Line 103: Line 99:


{{Col-break|width=15%}}
{{Col-break|width=15%}}
[http://www.theosophy.wiki/mywiki/images/ML/128-2_6935.jpg http://www.theosophy.wiki/mywiki/images/ML/128-2_6935_thm.jpg]
[http://www.theosophy.wiki/mywiki/images/ML/128-3_6936.jpg http://www.theosophy.wiki/mywiki/images/ML/128-3_6936_thm.jpg]




Line 130: Line 126:
== Notes ==
== Notes ==
<references/>
<references/>
<br>


== Additional resources ==
[[Category:ML from Koot Hoomi]]
[[Category:ML to A. P. Sinnett]]
[[Category:ML needs background]]
[[Category:ML with images]]
[[Category:ML needs commentary]]

Revision as of 03:26, 1 March 2020

Quick Facts
People involved
Written by: Koot Hoomi
Received by: A. P. Sinnett
Sent via: unknown
Dates
Written on: unknown
Received on: Summer 1884
Other dates: unknown
Places
Sent from: unknown
Received at: London
Via: unknown 

This is Letter No. 128 in The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, 4th chronological edition. It corresponds to Letter No. 63 in Barker numbering. See below for Context and background.

< Prev letter chrono  Next letter chrono >  
< Prev letter Barker  Next letter Barker >

Cover sheet

Received London, Summer, 1884.


128-0_Cover_sheet_933_thm.jpg



NOTES:

Page 1 transcription, image, and notes

Good friend —

When our first correspondence began, there was no idea then of any publications being issued on the basis of the replies you might receive. You went on putting questions at random, and the answers being given at different times to disjointed queries, and so to say, under a semi-protest, were necessarily imperfect, often from different standpoints. When the publication of some of these were permitted for the Occult World, it was hoped that among your readers some may be able, like yourself, to put all the different pieces together and evolve out of them the skeleton, or a shadow of our system, which, although not exactly the original — this would be an impossibility — would be as near an approach to it as could be made by a non-initiate. But the results have proved quasi-disastrous! We had tried an experiment and sadly failed! Now we see that none but those who have passed at least their third initiation are able to write upon those subjects comprehensively. A Herbert Spencer would have made a mess of it under your circumstances. Mohini is certainly not quite right, in some details he is positively wrong, but so are you my old friend, though the outside reader is none the wiser for it and no one, so far, has noticed the real vital errors in Esoteric Buddhism and Man; nor are they likely to. We can give no further information on the subject already approached by you and have to leave the facts already communicated to be woven into a consistent and systematic philosophy by the


128-1_6934_thm.jpg

NOTES:

Page 2

chelas at the Headquarters. The Secret Doctrine will explain many things, set to right more than one perplexed student.

Therefore, to put before the world all the crude and complicated materials in your possession in the shape of old letters, in which, I confess, much was purposely made obscure, would only be making confusion worst confounded. Instead of doing any good thereby to yourself and others it would only place you in a still more difficult position, bring criticism upon the heads of the "Masters" and thus have a retarding influence on human progress and the T.S. Hence I protest most strongly against your new idea. Leave to the Secret Doctrine the task of avenging you. My letters must not be published, in the manner you suggest, but on the contrary if you save Djual K trouble copies of some should be sent to the Literary Committee at Adyar — about which Damodar has written to you — so that with the assistance of S. T. K. Charya, Djual K., Subba Row and the Secret Committee (from which H.P.B. was purposely excluded by us to avoid new suspicions and calumnies) they might be able to utilise the information for the realization of the object with which the Committee was started, as explained by Damodar in the letter written by him under orders. It is neither new "Kiddle developments" that I seek to avoid, nor criticism directed against my personality, which indeed can hardly be reached; but I rather try to save yourself and Society from new troubles which would be serious


128-2_6935_thm.jpg

NOTES:

Page 3

this time. The letters, in short, were not written for publication or public comment upon them, but for private use, and neither M. nor I will ever give our consent to see them thus handled.

As regards your first letter Dj.K. has been instructed to attend to it. In such delicate matters I am still less competent to give advice than to satisfy aspiring "chelas" of the "L.C.H." sort. I am afraid the "poor, dear Mrs. Holloway" is showing her white teeth and would hardly be found now "a charming companion". Under instructions Olcott wrote a letter to Finch — which gives the key to the little problem. It is Fern, Moorad Ali, Bishen Lal and other wrecks, over again. Why shall "would-be" chelas with such intense self personalities, force themselves within the enchanted and dangerous circle of probation! Pardoning my short letter, I am very busy just now with the coming new year.

K. H.


128-3_6936_thm.jpg


NOTES:

Context and background

Physical description of letter

The original is in the British Library, Folio 3. George Linton and Virginia Hanson described the letter this way:

KH script in blue pencil on two sheets of paper.[1]

Publication history

Commentary about this letter

Notes

  1. George E. Linton and Virginia Hanson, eds., Readers Guide to The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett (Adyar, Chennai, India: Theosophical Publishing House, 1972), 198.