POKROV IS A SPIRITUAL ASSOCIATION OF ESOTERIC.
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
The Friendly Philosopher-In the Beginning
The Friendly Philosopher
results of your own efforts, and those of all other sincere students.
The Western mind is apt to look upon mere literary form and fine phrases as the standard of judgment. People in general do not get the
meaning of what is written, in the same way that they do not extract the value from their experiences. They make surface deductions
and applications only. So they have little ability to apply the philosophy to daily life, nor can they see its practical value. They have to be
helped to assimilate the fundamental principles if they are to realize right valuations and applications. Each has to eradicate his own
faults in these as in other directions—not the faults of others. Until students set to work seriously on these lines they cannot find surety
nor happiness. Theosophy and its application go together, if there is to be real progress. It is not for us to say, “Do this,” or “Don’t do
that.” It is for us to put the case, Theosophy and its individual
application, and leave each student, each inquirer, to make his own decisions. People get into tight places right along by following
“advices,” instead of exercising their own discrimination, and then invariably blame the “advisor” when matters do not go according to
their expectations.
Is it not strange that plain statements are not grasped? That superficial meanings are taken to be true applications? Most men think,
when they have heard a statement made, they know it. All of this is chargeable to our modern educational methods, wherein soul and
mind are considered as mere recorders. “Amongst thousands of mortals a single one perhaps strives for perfection.” So, among the
many who may be interested in Theosophy—the philosophy of the perfectibility of Man—here and there will be one who may wake up.
Therein lies the hope. And even those who are interested enough merely to listen or to read with attention, will get something in the way
of a trend that may some day develop. If we keep trying in all proper ways and means open to us, something will come from such
mutual endeavors.
The fundamental statements of the Teachers are axioms to be applied. At the same time they are woven in with such reasoning as may
affect the ordinary way of thinking. Science, Psychology, and all efforts that are based on them, fail—and for no other reason than that
they do not assume or admit that full and true knowledge exists. If Western Science and Psychology would go on with their painstaking
efforts in the light of Theosophy, the spiritual and intellectual darkness of the world would soon be overcome and a civilization brought
into being that would best express a true physical life. What hinders? Intellectual pride, together with the cramping effects of false
religious conceptions. If the idea is held that there is but one life on earth, then all the learning of the man and of the age is limited to a
small and narrow range. But if one grasps the idea of successive lives on earth—all under Karma—then, the learning takes on a wider
sweep, leading the man to the conception that all powers of every kind proceed from the Supreme, the Self of all creatures; that he
himself is in reality a spiritual being, and must think and act as such.
We may not be able to apply, as fully as we and others might desire, all the axioms and reasoning of the philosophy; but what of that?
We can apply what is possible and all that is possible to us, and in that application greater understanding and facility arise. Each one
has to find his way. Words cannot give it, yet there is a way for each. Most of the trouble lies in trying to see, trying to hear, trying to
“think” it all out, instead of applying what we do see. All ability comes very gradually, imperceptibly—felt, grasped, realized, rather than
perceived in the ordinary sense. Here, there is not enough acquaintance as yet with the philosophy itself for many of the students to
have confidence enough to take hold and carry on the work. When I have hinted at approaching departure, it brings dismay because
they imagine that Theosophy will be dead if I go: yet they ought to have learned that no one is Theosophy and the best are but
transmitters; that they too, having received, should get busy doing as much by others, becoming transmitters in their turn. 41
Associates of “U. L. T.”! If 25 of them turn out to be “good stuff,” will the effort not prove to be worth all that it has cost? “Good stuff”
means just that many Warriors for the restoration of the Theosophical Movement to its original lines. Many thousands are needed, but
as the body grows, it takes care of itself. The struggle will be fierce—as we face it, not knowing the outcome—but the struggle is for us,
or we would not have it. We will take what comes, and will give all that we are and have to the common cause, knowing that we are not
fighting for self but for all. More we cannot do, and less we may not do under the Law of Brotherhood. A year ago today we began this
struggle, and so it naturally brings retrospections to us. Things past are always easier than things present, or the unknown yet to come.
The past can be judged as to relative importance, for it is now the hollow of the wave of progress, whereas the present and the future
represent the crest and the resistance felt or feared. Yet— if we remember—the past, when it was both present and future,held just
such disturbances which we now see were a waste of energy. In the writings of the Teachers there is naught but encouragement. It is
the deep sense of the gulf between our ideals and their attainment that dismays the personal conception. If we involve “ourselves” in
these personal conceptions, we shall feel despondent—like Arjuna. In reality we should feel more of encouragement than ever, for the
past year has brought a success greater than we could then have dared to hope in the circumstances.
We are all links in the great chain of the Theosophical Movement. What affects one affects all, and in degree. Everyone who endeavors
to help others in any real way, puts himself in the position where he must take the reactions. The Karma of the Parent theosophical
society is that of H. P. B. and Judge, known by them beforehand in a general way. It is also our Karma and that of all other
Theosophists. Theirs was the first effort to spread Theosophy; much has been done since in this respect, and by many students. But its
application has not been as general as might have been. The reactions from the spread of Theosophy and of its mis- and non-
application by students will be taken care of when They come again. We and all other true students are linked with the Great Lodge by
aspiration, by service, by following the Masters’ program as nearly as we know. All sincere students are surrounded by an “invisible
escort” as long as their faces are set toward the Goal and they remain staunch to Masters’ program. Masters neither push, pull, nor
hinder voluntary action. To do so would be to prevent true Self reliance. For this reason some may think that Masters have deserted
them, or do not see nor hear them; but this is the worst conception that could be. It belittles Them and implies ignorance and ingratitude
on Their part. They have spoken clearly of Their nearness to all those who “try and ever keep trying.”
—ROBERT CROSBIE
Letter Twelve
“MASTERS never cease working, but they cease at times from such public efforts as were made at the establishment of the
Theosophical Society; before that They were working with individuals.” Mr. Judge made this statement at a crucial time, repeating what
the Master had written years before to Mr. Sinnett, and what H. P. B. had more than once put of record.
Applying this, it would seem to mean that They are not now working directly with any theosophical bodies as such, as They at one time
were working with the Parent society, but that They continue to work with individuals. Those who thought or think that any organization
carries the Masters with it have taken the shadow for the substance, have mistaken the tool for the Work man. If these mistaken
theosophical leaders were really Initiates, or under the guidance of Masters, there would not be so much of personality and pretensions
in evidence as are exhibited on every hand. Even minor Initiates would not act that way.
It may very well be that the public effort and the recorded teachings of the Masters were put forth in order to find willing, clear-eyed and
noble-hearted men and women, able to see their true destiny and anxious to serve humanity. If it did not and does not find them, then H.
P. B. and Judge’s mission was largely futile—for Theosophy can be used selfishly as well as in the right way. The good comes from the
fact that Theosophic ideas pave the way for those who are as yet not clear-eyed. So even those who selfishly use Theosophical ideas
unconsciously help by keeping these ideas before the world. Theosophy is, and even a mistaken idea of it may lead to a correct
understanding. Let us keep to the correct understanding and refrain from condemnation, and success must come in some measure. If
we make and keep our selves ready and fit, we shall be used as occasion and fitness permit. We are dealing with minds, not persons.
The Soul, being conformed to the mind, reacts upon the whole nature. If, as persons, we could all look at the world of ideas in that way,
we would learn more, gain more discrimination, and be more useful to others, so meriting Their guiding influence. It is Karma, all of it;
students should realize that and benefit by the knowledge. The right start is everything. If this is gained and held, then all that each one
does carries him and others in the right direction. In this Work, natures are intensified, good and bad come to the surface. The
‘cleaning-up” process is gradual and each must do his own work of elimination where such work is seen to be needed. The barriers to
help from Masters are in ourselves and nowhere else.
Either Theosophy pure and undefiled is the most real thing in the world, or we are all wasting our time and effort. If we are able to
conceive its reality in all seriousness, we should then never cease trying to understand and apply what has been recorded by Masters’
Messenger for our guidance and instruction. What is the distinction between Theosophy and anything else? In Fundamental Principles,
I should say. Nothing else affords an all-inclusive view of existence. All kinds of sincere efforts help, all kinds of systems contain some
truth, but they all fall short, because they all exclude or ignore some part of nature. Theosophists of every degree should realize that
under Karma much is required of those to whom much has been given in opportunity and knowledge. We can only use our
opportunities and knowledge to the best possible advantage and continue to do so, if we would not ourselves fall short of the
requirement of ‘ Law of Laws—Compassion absolute.” What has been done has been of real and lasting advantage to many; there are
others yet unborn, yet to come. This is the time when one wishes to be like Brahma with “eyes, heads, mouths and ears in every
direction.” Read “The Tidal Wave” in Lucifer, volume V, page 173, if you would learn how H. P. B. felt—and feels. The real point of
issue is the divine nature in man. The real basis of work is to impress this on the minds of those who come. In Theosophy
we have this basis. A right philosophy is desperately needed by the world. Without this, strength and special faculties are useless
because they are misapplied. Theosophy is not merely words. It is Life, and this includes all things in life and all the planes of living. To
have Brotherhood among the many, it is first necessary to realize brotherhood among the few, and the basis of brotherhood is the
divinity inherent in all men.
All true impressions come from within—from the highest Principle in us, Atma, or the Divinity which is one and the same in all. If there is
nothing in the brain but impressions from the lower principles of our being, nothing to connect the Thinker with higher planes, he can but
waver between these lower states. If thought is to rise further, it must be thought without a brain. Nature works by orderly processes to
which we give the name of law. In the individual it is called the Will. By an act of the will all ordinary mental processes may be stopped;
then the habitual center of mental action may be transcended and the ascent to the next plane made, without losing the power to
perceive on this. In all such attempts we must keep the Fundamentals in view—in mind. -The Spirit in man, the Perceiver, is “untouched
by troubles, works, fruits of works, or desires.” It seems to me that the clearest comprehension, if not understanding, of all this comes
from dwelling on the idea of the Perceiver as looking into one or another of his “sheaths” and finding there the record of the actions in
any or all of them.
Everything depends on what one has in mind—his fundamental conceptions of Deity, Nature, and Man, when considering or attempting
to practice “concentration.” The general idea on this as on other subjects and objects is purely personal. There is no self-examination
of motives, no altruism, no effort to carry out in daily life the assumed object of fitting one’s self to be the better able to help and teach
others, no observation of the evil effects of rushing in for “psychic development.” H. P. B. says, “One has to have an unshakable faith in
the Deity within, an unlimited belief in his own power to learn; otherwise he is bound to fall into delusion and irresponsible mediumship.”
Here is the signpost of warning against all attempts to develop psychically before one has learned to master and guide the lower,
personal self. What is indispensable is right philosophy and its application in daily life. By the wrong attitude in this and other respects,
many well-meaning theosophists fail, and harm themselves and others. The meaning is plain. Leave psychism alone; work from the
spiritual side upon the lower nature—visible and invisible, psychic and physical—first, by analysis and comprehension of the principles
of our being as Theosophy teaches, then by the guidance of knowledge as it arises within oneself. We pass from plane to plane daily,
but relate everything to the brain circle of necessity, and thus lose the real meanings. Dwelling on the Fundamentals and the endeavor
to help others is the true concentration. Mr. Judge wrote: “Thus the Will is freed from the domination of desire and at last subdues the
mind itself.”
We have to gain, each for himself, the unshakable faith that “the Master’s hand is over all” sincere Theosophists, the humblest as the
most progressed. In true work for Masters’ Cause there is no rivalry. Our place in that Work is clear to us, and can be shown to be clear
to anyone who will take the trouble to make the search that we have made. This place we hold for those who have the good Karma to
come in contact with it before meeting other phases of the Movement, as well as for those who, having met other phases, are either
entangled in them or trying to find a way out of them. The harm of the dark phases we cannot help, but we can let the true light shine “as
widely and as quickly as possible.” I would like to see the “U. L. T.” Declaration known to every Theosophist as to every searcher for
Truth.
—ROBERT CROSBIE
IN THE BEGINNING
Letter Thirteen
The tendency among men to accept words and names as realities is unfortunately all too common. An article in a publication issued by
one of the theosophical organizations propounds the question “Theosophy or Orthodoxy; Which?”—evidently presenting to its readers
the necessity for a choice between them.
A moment’s thought should have shown that Orthodoxy has no existence of itself, but can only be considered in relation to some
formulated system of thought, and that the title in question presents an impossible situation.
This would be a small matter and could have been passed over without notice if the same unfortunate tendency had not been applied
to a field of thought where correctness of understanding is vital. For, if Theosophy is taken to be something of an abstraction, or a
simple point of beginning from which a system is to be developed by individual research, the whole idea of Masters as the custodians
of the accumulated wisdom of the ages and Their Message to the world of men, has to be abandoned. This is practically the position
taken in the article in question; for, while there are occasional references to both Messenger and Message, these seem to be used as
names and not as realities.
The question therefore which every student should put before himself for solution is neither orthodoxy nor heterodoxy, but— “Did
anyone present to the world a formulated system of philosophy, religion and science? Did that personage give a name to the system?
Who was that personage?” The answer cannot be obtained by consulting the opinions of any person or persons whatever; they are
questions of fact, and facts alone can answer.
Every student worthy of the name knows that H. P. Blavatsky gave a body of knowledge to the world; that She named what She gave
“Theosophy” and that She explicitly declared it to be from the Masters of Wisdom.
In justice to the Message, to the Messenger who brought it and to the ideal of Masters, nothing should be named Theosophy but this
Message. Whoever takes any other position violates the first laws of occultism by belittling both Message and Messenger, and cannot
expect to benefit by them. Those who accept the Message and belittle the Messenger, are equally unfortunate, for in belittling one, they
belittle both. To these it should be said that it is folly to imagine that the Masters of Wisdom did not know enough to select a
Messenger who would deliver Their Message correctly and in its entirety. The Masters’ wisdom being questioned, the whole edifice
falls to the ground.
The materials of which that building was composed may of course be put to use by those who desire to erect structures according to
their own ideas, and sad to say, this is exactly what has occurred among the various theosophical organizations; each has taken more
or less of the material supplied by the Message of Theosophy, has built an edifice according to ideas of its own, and has labeled its
structure “theosophical.” Each building so constructed differs from every other.
Yet—here was a building known as “Theosophy,” complete in design and structure; each separate component part accurately adjusted
to every other part and to the whole.
The mystery of it all is that these latter-day constructors should recognize the beauty and symmetry of the portions selected by them,
and fail to perceive that there was a perfect building, an Architect and a plan. It is the old story over again: “They have divided his
raiment among them and for his vesture have cast lots.” The failure to accept the teaching as given and to revere the ones whose
sacrifice made that presentation possible is at the root of every past failure. The responsibility for every failure rests with those who
interposed themselves between the Message and those who would learn. The woe of the world has been intensified by such as these,
and surely a fearful responsibility is theirs. It is no small thing to obstruct the work of the Lodge of Masters, hence every student, be he
prominent among his fellow-men or not, should take heed lest he fall and in falling drag down thousands with him. There is but one safe
course. Theosophy must be understood to be a gift to mankind by more progressed beings than ourselves. We must learn, and a the
fundamental principles which underlie that grand philosophy, and understand the operation of law as disclosed therein. Then, and then
only can we begin to make Theosophy a living power in our lives. We should preserve a willingness to give and receive instruction, but
we should in either case be sure that such instruction is in exact accord with the principles and laws set forth in the Theosophic
philosophy.
If each student did this, all would have one aim, one purpose, one teaching, and a sure basis for united effort. Such differences of
individual opinion as might arise would be solved by a careful adjustment of these to the philosophy. Thus all would be united; all
preserve the utmost freedom of thought; all progress most rapidly by self-induced and self-devised efforts. No one, then, would make
the fatal blunder of imagining that Theosophy is something which can be developed, but each would devote his thought and effort to
growth along the lines that Theosophy indicates, so that he may become the better able to help and to teach others. If there are
Masters, and They have delivered a Message to us, that Message is Their Orthodoxy—or right understanding; this should be preferred
to that of all others, however highly such may esteem themselves or be esteemed by their fellow-men.
—-ROBERT CROSBIE.
IN THE BEGINNING
Letter Fourteen
“The orthodoxy of Masters, or that of men?” This question is raised in a communication signed “A Student.” We care nothing for the
identity of our correspondent, but we have respect for an honest expression of opinion, and are glad to make answer. Not that we
desire to change “A Student’s” opinion but that she (or he) and others of like conceptions, may gain something of an insight into the
causes and reasons for the methods pursued by the Associates of The United Lodge of Theosophists. We quote from the
communication the following:
“Providing we remember that Theosophy is not a dogmatical presentment of the Wisdom-Religion—a system delivered for once to the
Saints—but a progressive system of Religion.”
There is some confusion in this statement, for if there is such a knowledge as the Wisdom-Religion, it is the result of the observation
and experience of the Masters of Wisdom, and as such stands for itself; it can neither be enlarged nor improved upon by its students.
Furthermore, what was named “Theosophy” by Mme. Blavatsky is that same Wisdom-Religion so far as the latter has been
promulgated by the Teacher. In regard to the latter statement H. P. B. herself has written:
The Secret Doctrine (or Wisdom-Religion) is not a series of vague theories or treatises, but is all that can be given out in this century. It
will be centuries before much more is given. A similar statement by Wm. Q. Judge is as follows:
It (Theosophy) is not a belief or dogma formulated or invented by man, but is a knowledge of the laws which govern the evolution of the
physical, astral, psychical and intellectual constituents of nature and of man.
In the face of such statements and similar ones made by Those who brought Theosophy to us, the assumption that it is a system of
progressive religion can only proceed from ignorance of the facts, and a false conception which can only lead to confusion on the part
of any “student.” Theosophy is not a religion, but Religion itself in the truest sense; even the use of the term “religion” without any
qualification is misleading, for Theosophy is not “a belief” as religions are generally, but rather Religious Science, Scientific-Religion,
and an all-inclusive Philosophy.
As to “a dogmatical presentment,” Theosophy has never been put forth as a Dogma, but as a relation of facts which have been
gathered through observation and experience, which any one can accept or reject without condemnation or praise. One might as well
call the only exact science we use, viz., Mathematics, dogmatic or a dogma because it is presented as an assemblage of facts which
the student can study, apply and prove for himself. Theosophy stands in exactly the same position: a presentation of Knowledge gained
through aeons of time; it is not to be confounded with the speculations of any of its students, who at best are subject to their personal
prejudices, predilections and weaknesses. It should also be clearly understood that all theosophical writers or leaders—except Those
who brought Theosophy to the world—are students of more or less proficiency in the Science, and are therefore liable to
misconceptions and erroneous applications. The only possibility of discerning such errors lies in a comparison with the Science as
originally presented.
In the same communication we are taken to task in the following words, “you are doing no good by ‘barking against the bad’ as
Emerson would say, about what is going on in the Theosophical world. I believe you over-emphasize the evil that is being done, while
minimizing the good.”
It is admitted that evil is being done. Can it be wrong to point out where and how such evil comes about? How else can any sincere
student who desires only to warn against pitfalls help his fellow-men?
As to the “good” in any presentation, it stands for itself, and is the only reason why error or evil has any possibility of acceptance; it is
the mixture of Truth and Error that confuses and misleads the ignorant and the unwary. Remove the error and its sequence, evil, and the
Truth stands out all the more clearly; there is no “minimizing the good” in such a course.
It is an unfortunate fact that there are more misconceptions and misapplications of Theosophy among its would-be students, than there
is of real understanding. Most of this is due to the self-acclaimed leaders of societies who are very prominent in the public eye, and
who proclaim and issue their own ideas, interpretations, and speculations as Theosophy pure and simple. One would expect from such
exponents the false and misleading idea that “Theosophy is a progressive system of religion,” for such a statement beclouds the facts,
and serves to draw attention to their own lucubrations as “progressed” Theosophy, and to themselves as having progressed farther
and as knowing more than the original Teachers. No one would have a word to say if these exponents chose some other name under
which to promulgate their ideas, but to present the latter as Theosophy,—the Message delivered to the world by Masters—is to our
mind the greatest imaginable crime against humanity. Every presentation of Truth given to the world in the past has been vitiated in a
similar way, being filtered through the minds of the original disciples to the disciples of the latter, and so on for generations, until but
little was left of the spirit of the Message—and that little obscured by systems of materialistic concepts under the name of religion.
Under the conditions of past periods, this could not be helped, because there existed no way by which the “written word” could be so
duplicated as to place it within the reach of every human being who desired it. The present period, however, made it possible for every
enquirer to obtain or study Masters’ Message as it was written by one qualified to do so. This was done in order that there should be
no need of intermediaries between those who would know and the knowledge itself. But, sad to say, many who drew their inspiration
and ideas from the delivered Message, and had the great Karmic opportunity of presenting and promulgating that Message pure and
undefiled to the world-at-large, turned the eyes of men to their own personalities as “successors” and “teachers” and have not only
misled thousands of adherents, but have made the name of Theosophy stand for everything that is undesirable in the minds of humanity
at large. H. P. B. and W. Q. J. knew well the probability and the danger of such a sequence, but They could only warn. H. P. B.’s last
message to Theosophists in Convention assembled contained the following words: “Never is there greater danger than when vanity,
ambition and a desire to lead, dresses itself up in the peacock feathers of altruism.”
What is at the root of the schisms that have disrupted the Theosophical Society that H. P. B. left? Personalities every time. ‘What is the
opposite and corrective of Personality? Nothing less than Impersonality which seeks nothing for itself and every thing for the Cause of
Theosophy pure and simple. There is no worldly fame, glory or profit in such a course, yet it, and it alone, removes every obstacle that
might intervene between the Message of Theosophy and those who desire to study and apply it on its own merits. For that reason, and
that reason alone, are the magazine Theosophy and “The United Lodge of Theosophists” conducted anonymously. The mind of the
race is still obsessed by the idea that it is important and essential to know who the active agents are, whereas the important thing is
the merit of the thing done. The injunction by the Man of Nazareth, “Let not thy right hand know what thy left hand doeth” is as binding as
any other injunction of His, but do Christian peoples follow it, or regard it as of any importance? Do theosophical exponents exhibit a
regard for the above injunction, or for that more explicit one they well know, “that power which the disciple shall covet is that which shall
make him appear as nothing in the eyes of men”? Let them answer. If they excuse themselves, it will be on the ground that men will not
listen unless the personality of the speaker is under intimate inspection; but have they tried it? Truth is not dependent upon the one who
utters it, but upon its own self-evident nature, and whether spoken by the wicked man or one who is esteemed as righteous, it is neither
debased by the one nor enhanced by the other.
If Theosophists or Christians recognize that the world has gone mad on personalities, can it be made sane by glossing over that
madness or pleading expediency? They know it cannot; but they are the creatures of their generation and have not the courage to do
that which puts personality out of court in their own cases, and sets the example of a truer, less selfish line of effort. Yet if the change is
to be brought about, someone must make the beginning; it is the first step that begins the count, and if the goal is a right and true one,
the results can be left to time and Karma. We rest on that.
—ROBERT CROSBIE
BACK
results of your own efforts, and those of all other sincere students.
The Western mind is apt to look upon mere literary form and fine phrases as the standard of judgment. People in general do not get the
meaning of what is written, in the same way that they do not extract the value from their experiences. They make surface deductions
and applications only. So they have little ability to apply the philosophy to daily life, nor can they see its practical value. They have to be
helped to assimilate the fundamental principles if they are to realize right valuations and applications. Each has to eradicate his own
faults in these as in other directions—not the faults of others. Until students set to work seriously on these lines they cannot find surety
nor happiness. Theosophy and its application go together, if there is to be real progress. It is not for us to say, “Do this,” or “Don’t do
that.” It is for us to put the case, Theosophy and its individual
application, and leave each student, each inquirer, to make his own decisions. People get into tight places right along by following
“advices,” instead of exercising their own discrimination, and then invariably blame the “advisor” when matters do not go according to
their expectations.
Is it not strange that plain statements are not grasped? That superficial meanings are taken to be true applications? Most men think,
when they have heard a statement made, they know it. All of this is chargeable to our modern educational methods, wherein soul and
mind are considered as mere recorders. “Amongst thousands of mortals a single one perhaps strives for perfection.” So, among the
many who may be interested in Theosophy—the philosophy of the perfectibility of Man—here and there will be one who may wake up.
Therein lies the hope. And even those who are interested enough merely to listen or to read with attention, will get something in the way
of a trend that may some day develop. If we keep trying in all proper ways and means open to us, something will come from such
mutual endeavors.
The fundamental statements of the Teachers are axioms to be applied. At the same time they are woven in with such reasoning as may
affect the ordinary way of thinking. Science, Psychology, and all efforts that are based on them, fail—and for no other reason than that
they do not assume or admit that full and true knowledge exists. If Western Science and Psychology would go on with their painstaking
efforts in the light of Theosophy, the spiritual and intellectual darkness of the world would soon be overcome and a civilization brought
into being that would best express a true physical life. What hinders? Intellectual pride, together with the cramping effects of false
religious conceptions. If the idea is held that there is but one life on earth, then all the learning of the man and of the age is limited to a
small and narrow range. But if one grasps the idea of successive lives on earth—all under Karma—then, the learning takes on a wider
sweep, leading the man to the conception that all powers of every kind proceed from the Supreme, the Self of all creatures; that he
himself is in reality a spiritual being, and must think and act as such.
We may not be able to apply, as fully as we and others might desire, all the axioms and reasoning of the philosophy; but what of that?
We can apply what is possible and all that is possible to us, and in that application greater understanding and facility arise. Each one
has to find his way. Words cannot give it, yet there is a way for each. Most of the trouble lies in trying to see, trying to hear, trying to
“think” it all out, instead of applying what we do see. All ability comes very gradually, imperceptibly—felt, grasped, realized, rather than
perceived in the ordinary sense. Here, there is not enough acquaintance as yet with the philosophy itself for many of the students to
have confidence enough to take hold and carry on the work. When I have hinted at approaching departure, it brings dismay because
they imagine that Theosophy will be dead if I go: yet they ought to have learned that no one is Theosophy and the best are but
transmitters; that they too, having received, should get busy doing as much by others, becoming transmitters in their turn. 41
Associates of “U. L. T.”! If 25 of them turn out to be “good stuff,” will the effort not prove to be worth all that it has cost? “Good stuff”
means just that many Warriors for the restoration of the Theosophical Movement to its original lines. Many thousands are needed, but
as the body grows, it takes care of itself. The struggle will be fierce—as we face it, not knowing the outcome—but the struggle is for us,
or we would not have it. We will take what comes, and will give all that we are and have to the common cause, knowing that we are not
fighting for self but for all. More we cannot do, and less we may not do under the Law of Brotherhood. A year ago today we began this
struggle, and so it naturally brings retrospections to us. Things past are always easier than things present, or the unknown yet to come.
The past can be judged as to relative importance, for it is now the hollow of the wave of progress, whereas the present and the future
represent the crest and the resistance felt or feared. Yet— if we remember—the past, when it was both present and future,held just
such disturbances which we now see were a waste of energy. In the writings of the Teachers there is naught but encouragement. It is
the deep sense of the gulf between our ideals and their attainment that dismays the personal conception. If we involve “ourselves” in
these personal conceptions, we shall feel despondent—like Arjuna. In reality we should feel more of encouragement than ever, for the
past year has brought a success greater than we could then have dared to hope in the circumstances.
We are all links in the great chain of the Theosophical Movement. What affects one affects all, and in degree. Everyone who endeavors
to help others in any real way, puts himself in the position where he must take the reactions. The Karma of the Parent theosophical
society is that of H. P. B. and Judge, known by them beforehand in a general way. It is also our Karma and that of all other
Theosophists. Theirs was the first effort to spread Theosophy; much has been done since in this respect, and by many students. But its
application has not been as general as might have been. The reactions from the spread of Theosophy and of its mis- and non-
application by students will be taken care of when They come again. We and all other true students are linked with the Great Lodge by
aspiration, by service, by following the Masters’ program as nearly as we know. All sincere students are surrounded by an “invisible
escort” as long as their faces are set toward the Goal and they remain staunch to Masters’ program. Masters neither push, pull, nor
hinder voluntary action. To do so would be to prevent true Self reliance. For this reason some may think that Masters have deserted
them, or do not see nor hear them; but this is the worst conception that could be. It belittles Them and implies ignorance and ingratitude
on Their part. They have spoken clearly of Their nearness to all those who “try and ever keep trying.”
—ROBERT CROSBIE
Letter Twelve
“MASTERS never cease working, but they cease at times from such public efforts as were made at the establishment of the
Theosophical Society; before that They were working with individuals.” Mr. Judge made this statement at a crucial time, repeating what
the Master had written years before to Mr. Sinnett, and what H. P. B. had more than once put of record.
Applying this, it would seem to mean that They are not now working directly with any theosophical bodies as such, as They at one time
were working with the Parent society, but that They continue to work with individuals. Those who thought or think that any organization
carries the Masters with it have taken the shadow for the substance, have mistaken the tool for the Work man. If these mistaken
theosophical leaders were really Initiates, or under the guidance of Masters, there would not be so much of personality and pretensions
in evidence as are exhibited on every hand. Even minor Initiates would not act that way.
It may very well be that the public effort and the recorded teachings of the Masters were put forth in order to find willing, clear-eyed and
noble-hearted men and women, able to see their true destiny and anxious to serve humanity. If it did not and does not find them, then H.
P. B. and Judge’s mission was largely futile—for Theosophy can be used selfishly as well as in the right way. The good comes from the
fact that Theosophic ideas pave the way for those who are as yet not clear-eyed. So even those who selfishly use Theosophical ideas
unconsciously help by keeping these ideas before the world. Theosophy is, and even a mistaken idea of it may lead to a correct
understanding. Let us keep to the correct understanding and refrain from condemnation, and success must come in some measure. If
we make and keep our selves ready and fit, we shall be used as occasion and fitness permit. We are dealing with minds, not persons.
The Soul, being conformed to the mind, reacts upon the whole nature. If, as persons, we could all look at the world of ideas in that way,
we would learn more, gain more discrimination, and be more useful to others, so meriting Their guiding influence. It is Karma, all of it;
students should realize that and benefit by the knowledge. The right start is everything. If this is gained and held, then all that each one
does carries him and others in the right direction. In this Work, natures are intensified, good and bad come to the surface. The
‘cleaning-up” process is gradual and each must do his own work of elimination where such work is seen to be needed. The barriers to
help from Masters are in ourselves and nowhere else.
Either Theosophy pure and undefiled is the most real thing in the world, or we are all wasting our time and effort. If we are able to
conceive its reality in all seriousness, we should then never cease trying to understand and apply what has been recorded by Masters’
Messenger for our guidance and instruction. What is the distinction between Theosophy and anything else? In Fundamental Principles,
I should say. Nothing else affords an all-inclusive view of existence. All kinds of sincere efforts help, all kinds of systems contain some
truth, but they all fall short, because they all exclude or ignore some part of nature. Theosophists of every degree should realize that
under Karma much is required of those to whom much has been given in opportunity and knowledge. We can only use our
opportunities and knowledge to the best possible advantage and continue to do so, if we would not ourselves fall short of the
requirement of ‘ Law of Laws—Compassion absolute.” What has been done has been of real and lasting advantage to many; there are
others yet unborn, yet to come. This is the time when one wishes to be like Brahma with “eyes, heads, mouths and ears in every
direction.” Read “The Tidal Wave” in Lucifer, volume V, page 173, if you would learn how H. P. B. felt—and feels. The real point of
issue is the divine nature in man. The real basis of work is to impress this on the minds of those who come. In Theosophy
we have this basis. A right philosophy is desperately needed by the world. Without this, strength and special faculties are useless
because they are misapplied. Theosophy is not merely words. It is Life, and this includes all things in life and all the planes of living. To
have Brotherhood among the many, it is first necessary to realize brotherhood among the few, and the basis of brotherhood is the
divinity inherent in all men.
All true impressions come from within—from the highest Principle in us, Atma, or the Divinity which is one and the same in all. If there is
nothing in the brain but impressions from the lower principles of our being, nothing to connect the Thinker with higher planes, he can but
waver between these lower states. If thought is to rise further, it must be thought without a brain. Nature works by orderly processes to
which we give the name of law. In the individual it is called the Will. By an act of the will all ordinary mental processes may be stopped;
then the habitual center of mental action may be transcended and the ascent to the next plane made, without losing the power to
perceive on this. In all such attempts we must keep the Fundamentals in view—in mind. -The Spirit in man, the Perceiver, is “untouched
by troubles, works, fruits of works, or desires.” It seems to me that the clearest comprehension, if not understanding, of all this comes
from dwelling on the idea of the Perceiver as looking into one or another of his “sheaths” and finding there the record of the actions in
any or all of them.
Everything depends on what one has in mind—his fundamental conceptions of Deity, Nature, and Man, when considering or attempting
to practice “concentration.” The general idea on this as on other subjects and objects is purely personal. There is no self-examination
of motives, no altruism, no effort to carry out in daily life the assumed object of fitting one’s self to be the better able to help and teach
others, no observation of the evil effects of rushing in for “psychic development.” H. P. B. says, “One has to have an unshakable faith in
the Deity within, an unlimited belief in his own power to learn; otherwise he is bound to fall into delusion and irresponsible mediumship.”
Here is the signpost of warning against all attempts to develop psychically before one has learned to master and guide the lower,
personal self. What is indispensable is right philosophy and its application in daily life. By the wrong attitude in this and other respects,
many well-meaning theosophists fail, and harm themselves and others. The meaning is plain. Leave psychism alone; work from the
spiritual side upon the lower nature—visible and invisible, psychic and physical—first, by analysis and comprehension of the principles
of our being as Theosophy teaches, then by the guidance of knowledge as it arises within oneself. We pass from plane to plane daily,
but relate everything to the brain circle of necessity, and thus lose the real meanings. Dwelling on the Fundamentals and the endeavor
to help others is the true concentration. Mr. Judge wrote: “Thus the Will is freed from the domination of desire and at last subdues the
mind itself.”
We have to gain, each for himself, the unshakable faith that “the Master’s hand is over all” sincere Theosophists, the humblest as the
most progressed. In true work for Masters’ Cause there is no rivalry. Our place in that Work is clear to us, and can be shown to be clear
to anyone who will take the trouble to make the search that we have made. This place we hold for those who have the good Karma to
come in contact with it before meeting other phases of the Movement, as well as for those who, having met other phases, are either
entangled in them or trying to find a way out of them. The harm of the dark phases we cannot help, but we can let the true light shine “as
widely and as quickly as possible.” I would like to see the “U. L. T.” Declaration known to every Theosophist as to every searcher for
Truth.
—ROBERT CROSBIE
IN THE BEGINNING
Letter Thirteen
The tendency among men to accept words and names as realities is unfortunately all too common. An article in a publication issued by
one of the theosophical organizations propounds the question “Theosophy or Orthodoxy; Which?”—evidently presenting to its readers
the necessity for a choice between them.
A moment’s thought should have shown that Orthodoxy has no existence of itself, but can only be considered in relation to some
formulated system of thought, and that the title in question presents an impossible situation.
This would be a small matter and could have been passed over without notice if the same unfortunate tendency had not been applied
to a field of thought where correctness of understanding is vital. For, if Theosophy is taken to be something of an abstraction, or a
simple point of beginning from which a system is to be developed by individual research, the whole idea of Masters as the custodians
of the accumulated wisdom of the ages and Their Message to the world of men, has to be abandoned. This is practically the position
taken in the article in question; for, while there are occasional references to both Messenger and Message, these seem to be used as
names and not as realities.
The question therefore which every student should put before himself for solution is neither orthodoxy nor heterodoxy, but— “Did
anyone present to the world a formulated system of philosophy, religion and science? Did that personage give a name to the system?
Who was that personage?” The answer cannot be obtained by consulting the opinions of any person or persons whatever; they are
questions of fact, and facts alone can answer.
Every student worthy of the name knows that H. P. Blavatsky gave a body of knowledge to the world; that She named what She gave
“Theosophy” and that She explicitly declared it to be from the Masters of Wisdom.
In justice to the Message, to the Messenger who brought it and to the ideal of Masters, nothing should be named Theosophy but this
Message. Whoever takes any other position violates the first laws of occultism by belittling both Message and Messenger, and cannot
expect to benefit by them. Those who accept the Message and belittle the Messenger, are equally unfortunate, for in belittling one, they
belittle both. To these it should be said that it is folly to imagine that the Masters of Wisdom did not know enough to select a
Messenger who would deliver Their Message correctly and in its entirety. The Masters’ wisdom being questioned, the whole edifice
falls to the ground.
The materials of which that building was composed may of course be put to use by those who desire to erect structures according to
their own ideas, and sad to say, this is exactly what has occurred among the various theosophical organizations; each has taken more
or less of the material supplied by the Message of Theosophy, has built an edifice according to ideas of its own, and has labeled its
structure “theosophical.” Each building so constructed differs from every other.
Yet—here was a building known as “Theosophy,” complete in design and structure; each separate component part accurately adjusted
to every other part and to the whole.
The mystery of it all is that these latter-day constructors should recognize the beauty and symmetry of the portions selected by them,
and fail to perceive that there was a perfect building, an Architect and a plan. It is the old story over again: “They have divided his
raiment among them and for his vesture have cast lots.” The failure to accept the teaching as given and to revere the ones whose
sacrifice made that presentation possible is at the root of every past failure. The responsibility for every failure rests with those who
interposed themselves between the Message and those who would learn. The woe of the world has been intensified by such as these,
and surely a fearful responsibility is theirs. It is no small thing to obstruct the work of the Lodge of Masters, hence every student, be he
prominent among his fellow-men or not, should take heed lest he fall and in falling drag down thousands with him. There is but one safe
course. Theosophy must be understood to be a gift to mankind by more progressed beings than ourselves. We must learn, and a the
fundamental principles which underlie that grand philosophy, and understand the operation of law as disclosed therein. Then, and then
only can we begin to make Theosophy a living power in our lives. We should preserve a willingness to give and receive instruction, but
we should in either case be sure that such instruction is in exact accord with the principles and laws set forth in the Theosophic
philosophy.
If each student did this, all would have one aim, one purpose, one teaching, and a sure basis for united effort. Such differences of
individual opinion as might arise would be solved by a careful adjustment of these to the philosophy. Thus all would be united; all
preserve the utmost freedom of thought; all progress most rapidly by self-induced and self-devised efforts. No one, then, would make
the fatal blunder of imagining that Theosophy is something which can be developed, but each would devote his thought and effort to
growth along the lines that Theosophy indicates, so that he may become the better able to help and to teach others. If there are
Masters, and They have delivered a Message to us, that Message is Their Orthodoxy—or right understanding; this should be preferred
to that of all others, however highly such may esteem themselves or be esteemed by their fellow-men.
—-ROBERT CROSBIE.
IN THE BEGINNING
Letter Fourteen
“The orthodoxy of Masters, or that of men?” This question is raised in a communication signed “A Student.” We care nothing for the
identity of our correspondent, but we have respect for an honest expression of opinion, and are glad to make answer. Not that we
desire to change “A Student’s” opinion but that she (or he) and others of like conceptions, may gain something of an insight into the
causes and reasons for the methods pursued by the Associates of The United Lodge of Theosophists. We quote from the
communication the following:
“Providing we remember that Theosophy is not a dogmatical presentment of the Wisdom-Religion—a system delivered for once to the
Saints—but a progressive system of Religion.”
There is some confusion in this statement, for if there is such a knowledge as the Wisdom-Religion, it is the result of the observation
and experience of the Masters of Wisdom, and as such stands for itself; it can neither be enlarged nor improved upon by its students.
Furthermore, what was named “Theosophy” by Mme. Blavatsky is that same Wisdom-Religion so far as the latter has been
promulgated by the Teacher. In regard to the latter statement H. P. B. herself has written:
The Secret Doctrine (or Wisdom-Religion) is not a series of vague theories or treatises, but is all that can be given out in this century. It
will be centuries before much more is given. A similar statement by Wm. Q. Judge is as follows:
It (Theosophy) is not a belief or dogma formulated or invented by man, but is a knowledge of the laws which govern the evolution of the
physical, astral, psychical and intellectual constituents of nature and of man.
In the face of such statements and similar ones made by Those who brought Theosophy to us, the assumption that it is a system of
progressive religion can only proceed from ignorance of the facts, and a false conception which can only lead to confusion on the part
of any “student.” Theosophy is not a religion, but Religion itself in the truest sense; even the use of the term “religion” without any
qualification is misleading, for Theosophy is not “a belief” as religions are generally, but rather Religious Science, Scientific-Religion,
and an all-inclusive Philosophy.
As to “a dogmatical presentment,” Theosophy has never been put forth as a Dogma, but as a relation of facts which have been
gathered through observation and experience, which any one can accept or reject without condemnation or praise. One might as well
call the only exact science we use, viz., Mathematics, dogmatic or a dogma because it is presented as an assemblage of facts which
the student can study, apply and prove for himself. Theosophy stands in exactly the same position: a presentation of Knowledge gained
through aeons of time; it is not to be confounded with the speculations of any of its students, who at best are subject to their personal
prejudices, predilections and weaknesses. It should also be clearly understood that all theosophical writers or leaders—except Those
who brought Theosophy to the world—are students of more or less proficiency in the Science, and are therefore liable to
misconceptions and erroneous applications. The only possibility of discerning such errors lies in a comparison with the Science as
originally presented.
In the same communication we are taken to task in the following words, “you are doing no good by ‘barking against the bad’ as
Emerson would say, about what is going on in the Theosophical world. I believe you over-emphasize the evil that is being done, while
minimizing the good.”
It is admitted that evil is being done. Can it be wrong to point out where and how such evil comes about? How else can any sincere
student who desires only to warn against pitfalls help his fellow-men?
As to the “good” in any presentation, it stands for itself, and is the only reason why error or evil has any possibility of acceptance; it is
the mixture of Truth and Error that confuses and misleads the ignorant and the unwary. Remove the error and its sequence, evil, and the
Truth stands out all the more clearly; there is no “minimizing the good” in such a course.
It is an unfortunate fact that there are more misconceptions and misapplications of Theosophy among its would-be students, than there
is of real understanding. Most of this is due to the self-acclaimed leaders of societies who are very prominent in the public eye, and
who proclaim and issue their own ideas, interpretations, and speculations as Theosophy pure and simple. One would expect from such
exponents the false and misleading idea that “Theosophy is a progressive system of religion,” for such a statement beclouds the facts,
and serves to draw attention to their own lucubrations as “progressed” Theosophy, and to themselves as having progressed farther
and as knowing more than the original Teachers. No one would have a word to say if these exponents chose some other name under
which to promulgate their ideas, but to present the latter as Theosophy,—the Message delivered to the world by Masters—is to our
mind the greatest imaginable crime against humanity. Every presentation of Truth given to the world in the past has been vitiated in a
similar way, being filtered through the minds of the original disciples to the disciples of the latter, and so on for generations, until but
little was left of the spirit of the Message—and that little obscured by systems of materialistic concepts under the name of religion.
Under the conditions of past periods, this could not be helped, because there existed no way by which the “written word” could be so
duplicated as to place it within the reach of every human being who desired it. The present period, however, made it possible for every
enquirer to obtain or study Masters’ Message as it was written by one qualified to do so. This was done in order that there should be
no need of intermediaries between those who would know and the knowledge itself. But, sad to say, many who drew their inspiration
and ideas from the delivered Message, and had the great Karmic opportunity of presenting and promulgating that Message pure and
undefiled to the world-at-large, turned the eyes of men to their own personalities as “successors” and “teachers” and have not only
misled thousands of adherents, but have made the name of Theosophy stand for everything that is undesirable in the minds of humanity
at large. H. P. B. and W. Q. J. knew well the probability and the danger of such a sequence, but They could only warn. H. P. B.’s last
message to Theosophists in Convention assembled contained the following words: “Never is there greater danger than when vanity,
ambition and a desire to lead, dresses itself up in the peacock feathers of altruism.”
What is at the root of the schisms that have disrupted the Theosophical Society that H. P. B. left? Personalities every time. ‘What is the
opposite and corrective of Personality? Nothing less than Impersonality which seeks nothing for itself and every thing for the Cause of
Theosophy pure and simple. There is no worldly fame, glory or profit in such a course, yet it, and it alone, removes every obstacle that
might intervene between the Message of Theosophy and those who desire to study and apply it on its own merits. For that reason, and
that reason alone, are the magazine Theosophy and “The United Lodge of Theosophists” conducted anonymously. The mind of the
race is still obsessed by the idea that it is important and essential to know who the active agents are, whereas the important thing is
the merit of the thing done. The injunction by the Man of Nazareth, “Let not thy right hand know what thy left hand doeth” is as binding as
any other injunction of His, but do Christian peoples follow it, or regard it as of any importance? Do theosophical exponents exhibit a
regard for the above injunction, or for that more explicit one they well know, “that power which the disciple shall covet is that which shall
make him appear as nothing in the eyes of men”? Let them answer. If they excuse themselves, it will be on the ground that men will not
listen unless the personality of the speaker is under intimate inspection; but have they tried it? Truth is not dependent upon the one who
utters it, but upon its own self-evident nature, and whether spoken by the wicked man or one who is esteemed as righteous, it is neither
debased by the one nor enhanced by the other.
If Theosophists or Christians recognize that the world has gone mad on personalities, can it be made sane by glossing over that
madness or pleading expediency? They know it cannot; but they are the creatures of their generation and have not the courage to do
that which puts personality out of court in their own cases, and sets the example of a truer, less selfish line of effort. Yet if the change is
to be brought about, someone must make the beginning; it is the first step that begins the count, and if the goal is a right and true one,
the results can be left to time and Karma. We rest on that.
—ROBERT CROSBIE
BACK