Received 6-1-83.
My dear friend,
I approach a subject which I have purposely avoided for several months, until furnished with proofs that would appear conclusive even in your sight. We are not — as you know — always of the same way of thinking; nor has that which to us is — FACT — any weight in your opinion unless it violates in no way the Western methods of judging it. But now the time has come for us to try to have you, at least, understand us better than we hitherto have been even by some of the best and most earnest amongst western Theosophists — such for instance as C. C. Massey. And though I would be the last man living to seek to make you follow in my wake as your "prophet" and "inspirer," I would, nevertheless, feel truly sorry were you ever brought to regard me as a "moral paradox," having to suffer me either as one guilty of a false assumption of powers I never had, or — of misusing them to screen unworthy objects and, as unworthy persons. Mr. Massey's letter explains to you what I mean; that which seems conclusive proof to him and unimpeachable evidence, is neither for me — who know the whole truth. On this last day of your year 1882, his name comes third on the list of failures, — something (I hasten to say for fear of a new misconception) that has nothing to do whatever with the present arrangement regarding the proposed new Branch in London, yet everything with his personal progress. I deeply regret it, but have no right to bind myself so securely to any person or persons by ties of personal sympathy and esteem that my movements shall be crippled, and I, unable to lead the rest to something grander and nobler than their present faith. Therefore, I choose to leave him in his present errors.
The brief meaning of this is the following: Mr. Massey labours under the strangest misconceptions, and (literally) "dreams dreams" — though no medium, as his friend, Mr. S. Moses. With all he is the noblest, purest, in short, one of the best men I know, though occasionally too trusting in wrong directions. But he lacks entirely — correct intuition. It will come to him later on, when neither H.P.B. nor Olcott will be there. Until then — remember, and tell him so: we demand neither allegiance, recognition (whether public or private) nor will we have anything to do with, or say to the British Branch, — except through you. Four Europeans were placed on probation twelve months ago; of the four — only one, yourself, was found worthy of our trust. This year it will be Societies instead of individuals that will be tested. The result will depend on their collective work, and Mr. Massey errs when hoping that I am prepared to join the motley crowd of Mrs. K.'s "inspirers." Let them remain under their masks of St. John the Baptists and like Biblical aristocrats. Provided the latter teach our doctrines — however muddled up with foreign chaff — a great point will be gained. C.C.M. wants light — he is welcome to it — through you. Since it is all he wants what matters it whether he regards the "light-bearer" handing his torch to you — as a man of clean or unclean hands, so long as light itself is not affected by it? Only let me give you a warning. An affair now so trivial as to seem but the innocent expression of feminine vanity may, unless at once set aright, produce very evil consequences. In a letter from Mrs. Kingsford to Mr. Massey conditionally accepting the presidentship of the British T.S. she expresses her belief — nay, points it out as an undeniable fact — that before the appearance of "The Perfect Way" no one "knew what the Oriental school really held about Reincarnation"; and adds that "seeing how much has been told in that book the adepts are hastening to unlock their own treasures, so 'grudgingly doled out hitherto' (as H.X. puts it)." Mr. Massey, thereupon gives in reply a full adherence to this theory, and blossoms into an adroit compliment to the lady that would not discredit a plenipotentiary. "Probably," says he, "it is felt (by the Brothers) that a community among whom such a work as "The Perfect Way" can be produced and find acceptance is ready for the light!" Now, let this idea gain currency, and it will tend to convert into a sect the school of the highly estimable authoress, who, albeit a fifth rounder, is not exempt from quite a considerable dose of vanity and despotism, hence — bigotry. Thus, elevate the misconception into an undue importance; impair thereby her own spiritual condition by feeding the latent sense of Messiahship; and you will have obstructed the cause of free and general independent enquiry which her "Initiators" as well as we would wish promoted. Write then, good friend, to Mr. Massey the truth. Tell him that you were possessed of the Oriental views of reincarnation several months before the work in question had appeared — since it is in July (18 months ago) that you began being taught the difference between Reincarnation à la Allan Kardec, or personal rebirth — and of the Spiritual Monad; a difference first pointed out to you on July 5th at Bombay. And to allay another uneasiness of hers, say that no allegiance by her to the "Brothers" will be expected, (nor even accepted if offered) in as much as we have no present intention of making any further experiments with Europeans and will use no other channel than yourself to impart our Arhat philosophy. The intended experiment with Mr. Hume in 1882 failed most sadly. Better than your Wren are we entitled to the motto, festina lente!
And now, you will please follow me into still deeper waters. An unsteady, wavering, suspicious candidate at one end of the line; a declared unprincipled, (I say the word and maintain it) vindictive enemy at the other end; and you will agree that between London and Simla we are not very likely to appear in either a very attractive or anything like a true light. Personally such a state of things is hardly calculated to deprive us of sleep; as regards the future progress of the British T.S. and a few other Theosophists, the current of enmity travelling between the two places is sure to affect all those who will find themselves on its way — even yourself, in the long run, perchance. Who of you could disbelieve the explicit statements of two "gentlemen" both noted for their intellectual eminence, and one of whom, at least, is as incapable of uttering an untruth as of flying in the air? Thus, end of the cycle notwithstanding, there is a great personal danger for the Bsh. T.S. as for yourself. No harm can come now to the Society; much mischief is in store for its proposed Branch and its supporters, unless yourself and Mr. Massey are furnished with some facts and a key to the true situation. Now, if for certain and very good reasons, I have to leave C.C.M. to his delusions of guilt, regarding H.P.B., and my own moral shakiness, the time is ripe to show to you Mr. Hume in his true light, thus making a way with one false witness against us, while deeply regretting the fact that I am bound by the rules of our Order and my own sense of honour (however little it may be worth in the eyes of a European) not to divulge at present certain facts that would show C.C.M. at once, how deeply he is in error. I may tell you no news if I say that it was Mr. Hume's attitude when the Eclectic was formed that caused our chiefs to bring Mr. Fern and Mr. Hume together. The latter reproached us vehemently for refusing to take in as chelas — himself, and that sweet, handsome, spiritual and truth aspiring boy — Fern. We were daily dictated laws, and as daily taken to task for being unable to realize our own interests. And it will be no news though it may disgust and shock you, to learn that the two were brought into the closest relationship in order to bring out their mutual virtues and defects — each to shine in his own true light. Such are the laws of Eastern probation. Fern was a most remarkable psychic subject, naturally very spiritually inclined, but corrupted by Jesuit masters, and with his sixth and seventh Principles completely dormant and paralysed within him. No idea of right and wrong whatever; in short — irresponsible for anything but the direct and voluntary actions of the animal man. I would not have burdened myself with such a subject knowing beforehand that he was sure to fail. M. consented, for the chiefs have so wished it; and he deemed it useful and good to show to you the moral stamina and worth of him whom you regarded and called a friend. Mr. H. — you think, though lacking the finer, better feelings of a gentleman is yet one by his instincts as well as by birth. I do not pretend to be thoroughly well acquainted with the code of honour of Western nations. Yet, I doubt whether a man who, during the absence of the proprietor of certain private letters, avails himself of the key from the pocket of a waistcoat carelessly left on the verandah during work, opens with it the drawer of a writing desk, reads the private letters of that person, takes notes from them and then uses those contents as a weapon to satisfy his hatred and vindictiveness against their writer — I doubt, I say, whether even in the West such a man would be regarded as the ideal of even the average gentleman. And this and much more, I maintain, was done by Mr. Hume. Had I told you of it last August you would have never believed me. And now I am prepared to prove it over his own signature. Having been caught in the same honest occupation by M. twice, my Brother wrote purposely (or rather caused Damodar purposely to write) a certain letter to Fern enclosing a copy of a letter of Mr. H.'s to me. The knowledge of their contents was to bring out to light, when the time came, the true gentlemanly instincts and the honestly of him who sets himself so high above humanity. He is now caught in his own meshes. Hatred, and the irresistible thirst of abusing and vilifying in a letter to Olcott one who is so immeasurably higher than all his detractors, have led Mr. Hume into an imprudent confession. When caught and cornered — he resorts to a down-right, barefaced LIE.