K.H.
Letter No. 97 (ML-70) Rec. December 7, 1882
The date of the letter is not certainly known, and so there is no way of saying what the real circumstances were. Perhaps the actual place of this letter in the chronology is less important than the fact that apparently Sinnett was still longing for personal contact with the Mahatma, and the Mahatma had still to say, "not yet."
You will have learned ere now, my friend, that I was not deaf to your appeal to me, altho' I was unable to answer it as you — and I too — could have wished, by lifting for a moment the ever-thinning veil between us — "When?" do you ask me? I can but reply "not yet." Your probation is not ended, patience a little longer. Meanwhile you know the path to travel, it lies plainly before you for the present, tho' the choice of an easier if longer way may await you in the distant future.
Farewell my Brother.
Ever yours in sympathy,
K. H.
Letter No. 98 (ML-105) Rec. December 1882
This letter is in reply to a letter from Sinnett to the Mahatma K.H. in which apparently he told the Mahatma about an event in his life which was to have great repercussions.
It will be remembered that during the Sinnetts' trip to England in 1881, Sinnett had his first book, The Occult World, published. The book, familiar to most students of Theosophy, deals largely with phenomena produced by H.P.B. and includes information about the Mahatmas with whom Sinnett had come into correspondence through H.P.B. It made a profound impression upon the public at the time, but it earned Sinnett the displeasure of the Anglo-Indian community and alienated the proprietors of The Pioneer, of which he was editor. His relations with them from that time on were uneasy. Then there came a change in management: an Englishman by the name of Rattigan purchased the newspaper. He was even less sympathetic with Sinnett and apparently had no reluctance (or perhaps fewer inhibitions) about getting rid of him.
Finally, in November of 1882, Sinnett was given notice of the termination of his services as editor of this important newspaper, although this was not to be effective for a year' s time. This seems a fairly decent provision, since it gave Sinnett time to re-establish himself.
Presumably he wrote the Mahatma K.H. about the development and he may have suggested the production of another newspaper to promote political freedom in India. We do not have Sinnett's letter of course, but subsequent correspondence indicates that this was the case. So we have the inception of what has been called "The Phoenix Venture."
The unpleasant proceeding referred to in the second paragraph was a meeting of the Eclectic Theosophical Society in Simla, probably when H.P.B. and Sinnett were visiting the Humes there in 1881, to consider a letter from a man by the name of S.K. Chatterji. The letter was addressed to Hume and contained derogatory remarks about Theosophy and H.P.B.
Apparently Hume sent this letter to the Mahatma K.H. to read, and the latter returned it through H.P.B. In returning it to Hume, she said that the Mahatma had given orders "through her to the General Council" to invite Mr. Chatterji to resign. This upset Hume, who declared that the Mahatma was no gentleman; that the letter was a private letter. The Mahatma says the letter was not a private letter, since Hume had circulated it among the members. The Mahatma learned of all this through Djual Khul who had "heard it himself and has an excellent memory." This indicates that Djual Khul was there in his subtle body, as he is not among those listed by the Mahatma as present.
My dear friend —
Before I give you any definite answer to your business letter I desire to consult our venerable Chohan. We have, as you say 12 months time before us. For the present I have a little business on hand that is very important, as it hinges on to a series of other deliberate untruths, whose real character it is nigh time to prove. We are called in so many words, or rather in five letters "liars" (sic) and accused of "base ingratitude." The language is strong, and willing as we should feel to borrow many a good thing from the English, it is not politeness, I am afraid, that we would feel inclined to learn from the class of gentlemen represented by Mr. Hume. Left standing by itself, the business I am now concerned with you may truly regard as of very little importance; collated with other facts, unless shown on good and unimpeachable testimony as, to say the least, a perversion of facts — it tends to become a cause which will yield unpleasant effects and ruin the whole fabric. Do not, therefore, I pray you, stop to argue the utter unworthiness of the small remembrance, but relying upon our seeing something of the future which remains hidden to you, pray answer my question, as a friend and brother. When you have done that you will learn why this letter is written.
H.P.B. has just quarrelled with Djual Khool, who maintained that the unpleasant proceeding was not entered in the minutes by Davison, while she affirmed that it was. Of course he was right and she wrong. Yet if her memory failed her in this particular, it served her well as to the fact itself. You remember, of course the event. Meeting of the Eclectics in the Billiard room. Witnesses — yourself, the Hume pair, the Gordon couple, Davison and H.P.B. Subject: S. K. Chatterji, his letter to Hume expressing contempt for theosophy and suspicious about the good faith of H.P.B. Handing over the letter I had returned her to Mr. Hume, she said that I had given orders through her to the General Council to invite the Babu to resign. Thereupon Mr. Hume proclaimed most emphatically: "In such case your Koot Hoomi is no gentleman. The letter is a private letter and under these circumstances no gentleman would ever think of acting as desired by him." Now the letter was not a private one, since it was circulated by Mr. Hume among the members. At the time I paid no attention whatever to the fling. Nor had I come to know of it through H.P.B., but through D. Khool who had heard it himself and has an excellent memory.
Now, will you oblige me by writing for me two lines telling me as you remember the event. Were the words "no gentleman" applied to your humble servant or in general? I ask you as a gentleman, not as a friend. This has a very important bearing on the future. When done, I will let you see the latest development of the infinite "fertility of resource" at the command of our mutual friend. It may be, that under any other circumstances Mr. H.'s braggadocios about Lord Ripon's high opinion of Hume's theosophy and his "big talk" about his literary, monetary and other services rendered to us might pass unnoticed, for we all know his weaknesses; but in the present case they must be dealt with so as not to leave him a single straw to catch at, because his last letter to me (which you will see) — is not only entirely at variance with all the acknowledged rules of good breeding, but also because unless his own mis-statements are actually proved, he will boast hereafter of having given the direct lie to our Brotherhood, and that no member of the latter could ever permit it. You cannot fail to remark the absurd contrast between his apparent confidence in his wonderful powers and superiority and the soreness he exhibits at the slightest remark passed upon him by myself. He must be made to realize that were he really as great as he asserts, or even if he were himself quite satisfied of his greatness and the infallibility of his power of memory, whatever even the adepts might think, he would remain indifferent to, at any rate, would not be as vulgarly abusive as he is now. His sensitiveness is in itself evidence of the doubts lurking in his mind as to the validity of the claims he so boastfully puts forth; hence his irritability, excited by anything and everything that is likely to disturb his self-delusions.