A Letter to the Editor of Borderland. [1]
Dear Sir,—I am living in a small town located in a corner of the Austrian Alps, where I seldom see one of the English newspapers, and I know, therefore, very little in regard to the interest which the public in England take concerning the storm in a tea-kettle going on within the ranks of the Theosophical Society; nor do I care much to meddle with it to a great extent, for I believe that life is too short and too valuable to waste much of it with threshing mere straw, and with worthless disputations. However, having received, through the kindness of a friend, a couple of copies of Borderland, and finding my name frequently mentioned therein, I feel called upon to send you a few remarks, hoping that they may be instructive and amusing to some of your readers.
The Point of View.
First of all, allow me to preface my communication by saying that I nave no personal interest in this matter. I worship no person, and hate none; I have no one to praise, and none to condemn. I regard the personal attributes of a human being, his instincts, tendencies, intellectual and moral qualifications, as so many endowments given to him by nature—qualities belonging to the mortal house which the immortal spirit inhabits; and I blame nobody for his faults, but consider them as so many diseases or imperfections on the road of evolution, over which every one of us has to pass before he can arrive at his destination, which is divine self-knowledge (theosophia), and which can be attained in no other way than by overcoming one’s own selfish inclinations, and obtaining the mastery over self through the power of wisdom. Therefore, instead of blaming and vilifying each other, we ought to assist one another in understanding and overcoming our faults. The objects of Theosophy is not to manufacture a god out of the personal self, but to aid the divinity in man to manifest its power and wisdom; and this can be done, not by strengthening the sense of self and developing egotism, but by rising superior to self, through the power of unselfish love, and recognising the supremacy of the eternal spirit over matter and form.
But I must begin at the beginning.
Where is Theosophy?
“Theosophy” means “divine wisdom,” and wisdom is the realisation of truth. I have always been of a sceptical turn of mind; but, nevertheless, desirous of recognising the truth in whatever system it was to be found, and, having become deeply impressed with the profundity of thought and the exalted ideas contained in the writings of H. P. Blavatsky, I went to India in the year 1883, on invitation of Colonel Olcott, for the purpose of finding the way to the attainment of wisdom; for where could anybody expect to find it if not at the “headquarters of divine wisdom” (theosophia) itself.
Difficulties of the Search.
I have never regretted that voyage. By the aid of H. P. Blavatsky, I found the starting-point; but as to the individuals who at that time constituted the “Theosophical Society,” I did not find many who were already divinely wise. There were some very good, unselfish and intelligent men, but also a great many deluded ones, fanatics and dreamers, people whose brains were haunted by a sickly mysticism, some suffering from vanity and conceit, some “meaning well,” but, in spite of their good intentions, making one blunder after another, and perhaps the majority seeking not the truth itself, but personal salvation, the fulfilment of personal desires, the gratification of personal scientific curiosity, the acquisition of personal excellencies, by which they might have their own personal ambition or vanity gratified. All that my esteemed friend, St. George Lane-Fox, said in regard to myself in the April number of Borderland I am willing to endorse and subscribe. I do not claim to be better than others, and I do not doubt that there were some members of the Theosophical Society who knew more than I; but I also knew that in some things I had more experience than some of the others, and for this reason I did not resign my membership in the Theosophical Society, in spite of all the petty annoyances to which I was submitted, owing to the jealousy of some of the Hindus, and the ignorance of some of the Europeans; but believing that I might do some good by remaining with them, I did not consider it the proper way to begin my treatment of those whom I considered my patients by running away from the hospital, and leaving the sick to themselves.
The Talking Image of Urur.
My adventures at Adyar have been graphically described in my “Talking Image of Urur” (alluded to in Borderland), and the adventures described therein are all essentially true, I myself being the hero and making fun at my own expense; only the events told in that story are sometimes a little exaggerated, as may be properly done in a novel, so as to make the lessons more drastic, and to produce a more lasting impression on the mind of the reader. This story caused a great, deal of amusement to H. P. Blavatsky, who published it in Lucifer, and she frequently wrote to me in regard to it, as she received the manuscript of the succeeding chapters. In fact the story called forth a series of letters from H. P. Blavatsky to me, which are very instructive, and will soon be published in the Path.
The Disadvantages of Human Nature.
That which oiled the majority of the would-be theosophists at Adyar was, that they were not able to grasp the fundamental idea upon which the “Theosophical Society” rests, and which is held up in article I. of its constitution; namely, the “Universal Brotherhood of all Souls”; in other words “divine,” that is to say infinite, unlimited, unselfish, eternal and immortal love, such as results from the recognition of all beings being fundamentally and essentially one, differing from each other not in regard to their essence and origin, but only in regard to the attributes of their natures, which are the outcome of each one’s individual Karma. The incapacity of some of the members and leaders of the Theosophical Society has been the cause of all the trouble in the Theosophical Society from the time that it began to grow up to this present hour; and if these members of the Theosophical Society did not understand this great truth which H. P. Blavatsky taught, it was not the fault of H. P. Blavatsky, but the fault of the incapacity of those who were not able to grasp it. These members had all been human beings before they applied for membership in the Theosophical Society; the conferring of a diploma did not change their human nature; and as long as folly and selfishness are predominating powers among humanity, they will necessarily occupy a predominant place in every society, be it called “theosophical” or otherwise.
The Real H. P. B.
A great deal of paper and printer’s ink has been, and is still, wasted by the friends of H. P. Blavatsky, as well as by her enemies, in disputing about her personal qualities, and nevertheless this whole subject has nothing whatever to do with Theosophy, and is not an object of the Theosophical Society; on the contrary, no one can properly be called a “Theoeophist” unless he realises that the personality, with its personal virtues and personal vices, which all belong to the illusion of self, is illusive and impermanent, and that there is nothing of any permanent value in man, except that which is permanent, divine, and immortal in him, and which is above and beyond his self-delusion, self-conceit, self-righteousness, etc., belonging not to his mortal body nor to his earthly mind, but to the spiritual and divine principle, striving for manifestation and expression through the mental and physical organism that constitutes his terrestrial personality. It is not the candlestick but the flame of the candle that gives light; not the bottle but the wine contained therein which intoxicates. Those who seek only H. P. Blavatsky may be interested in her personal traits, but to the seeker for truth, only the truth that was revealed to her is of any importance; her personal idiosyncrasies are of no more interest to him than would be the information of her chambermaid in regard to the clothes she wore.
If H. P. Blavatsky had been a learned woman, full of her own theories and adopted opinions, she would have been entirely unfit to fulfil her mission, which was to communicate to her disciples the teachings of her teachers, the adepts. All that she needed for that purpose was the organization required for receiving the mental impressions by means of which the instruction took place; the power to understand those teachings, and the faculty to give expression to them in a proper form. The adulation of H. P. Blavatsky by her worshippers was as foolish as the attacks of her enemies. She was an exceedingly talented and very good woman, but with a great many faults; but the follower of wisdom has nothing to do with her virtues nor with her vices (if any); all that concerns him is the truth contained in the teachings coming through her. This truth is first of all to be understood, and afterwards it may be proved; but when it is once understood, it will invariably be found to be self-evident and to require no further proof. As to her occult phenomena, they were never intended to serve as a test for the truth of her teachings, nor could any phenomena ever prove a truth beyond the possibility of a doubt. Such phenomena, whether “genuine” or “false” (which means whether they originate in the way they are supposed to originate, or in some other way), are always illusive; they serve at best to attract attention, and this they do, be they spurious or not.
Mahatma Letters.
I have been in almost daily intercourse with H. P. Blavatsky for about two years, but I never saw her produce an occult phenomena for the purpose of giving a “test.” I have received quite a number of “occult letters,” supposed to come from Mahatmas, and I received them even while H. B. [P.] Blavatsky was in Europe; but these letters did not have the purpose of astonishing me, but to give me the information which I wanted. The writing of a letter is generally not done for the purpose of proving that the writer can write, or that he can send a letter, but for the purpose of communicating ideas when they cannot be communicated directly by words or, still more directly, by mental impression. This is just that which the critics of these phenomena never could see. It is very probable, however, that the occurrence of such phenomena that would astonish the ignorant was as necessary as the ringing of bells is necessary to call people’s attention to worship; for if H. P. Blavatsky’s teachings, or, to speak more correctly, the teachings given through her, had been left entirely to become known by their intrinsic merit, it would have taken perhaps hundreds of years before the world would have paid any attention to them, and they would have probably remained the exclusive property of a few. These phenomena are not theosophy, no more than the ringing of church bells is religion, or the advertisement of a theatrical performance the performance itself.
Theosophical Tomfoolery.
The occult phenomena which I witnessed had nothing incredible or astonishing or repulsive for me; but I was very much astonished at the incredible amount of tomfoolery that was mixed up in India with the propagation of those high and exalted teachings, and it is this profanation and vulgarization of truths considered sacred which I found repulsive, and which I tried to satirize in my “Talking Image of Urur.” This tomfoolery was due partly to the puerile spirit of the majority of the Indian members of the Theosophical Society, and partly to the excessive zeal of Colonel Olcott. There was a great deal of show and beating of drums and blowing of horns, bombast and playing soldiers, “presidential orders,” “Subba Prow [Row] medals” to tickle personal vanity, blue paper elephants, decorations, processions, tom-toms, and “tamasha.” In this way the Theosophical Society attracted to its ranks a great many superficial minds and lovers of play, and it is these elements that kept, and still keeps, many serious thinkers away from joining the Theosophical Society, as they do not wish to be found in such company owing to their own admiration of self.
For all that, I do not blame Colonel Olcott. His mission was to organize a society extending all over the world, and there is probably no man who could have fulfilled that mission so well. If he had been less credulous, he would have been leas enthusiastic; if he had been more dignified and in possession of more tact, he would have been more reserved. It is the fanatics who give the impulse to great movements, and even if they overshoot the mark, they do much better service than those who remain idle, wrapped up in their own dignity. A magnet has two poles and each thing two sides; excellent qualities are often found bound up with great faults. If we dismiss a good servant on account of his faults, we not only get rid of his faults, but also lose his good services. I know of no man who would have been so well adapted to help the birth and growth of such a society. It is true that in gathering so much, he gathered a great deal of worthless material; but on the “Day of Judgment,” which means the day on which the possession of a true understanding will be necessary to make one desire to remain any longer a member of the Theosophical Society, and to enter with the “elected” few the temple of wisdom, the dross will depart and return to their leaders and dogmas, the blind following the blind.
The Coming to Judgement.
This Day of Judgment seems to have come at present, and some great stars may fall. Not that they will be expelled by anybody, nor asked to resign; but their own mental blindness will exclude them from seeing the light. There are many good and virtuous men and women, who for all their admirable qualities have no real knowledge; but only accept a truth on the strength of some accepted authority. They believe, for instance, the doctrine of reincarnation, not because they have awakened to that state of spiritual consciousness, in which the spirit of man beholds and remembers the various forms in which he has become manifest on his way to his present stage of evolution; but they believe it to be true, because this or that person whom they believe respectable and entitled to credibility, has said that it was true, or they assume it to be probably true, owing to the apparent soundness of the arguments supporting such a theory. All this is very good and recommendable. In the absence of real knowledge, such as results from one’s own experience, we must be satisfied with arguments, theories, supposition) supported by external proofs; but it is not theosophy, it is not the direct possession of truth.
Truth or Self.
This possession of truth cannot be obtained by any man who clings to the delusion of “self,” for the truth is one, and cannot be divided or appropriated by any person exclusively, however well-meaning and self-righteous he may be. He who desires to possess eternal truth must give up the delusion of self, and enter into the spirit of truth. This is the great final lesson, taught by all great religions, by the doctrine of Nirana [Nirvana], which means the entering into all consciousness, as well as by the sacrifice on Mount Calvary, the symbol of entering into Divinity by sacrificing self for humanity. This self-sacrifice is not a merely external one, such as consists in doing benevolent actions with a feeling of personal superiority, or doing favours to others with an air of condescension; but it consists in the inward abandonment of all that originates from the idea of self and exclusiveness, the true self-sacrifice in which no loss of self is experienced or regretted, and which results from the recognition of the unity of all being through the power of divine (because unlimited) love. (See Article I. of the Constitution of the Theosophical Society.)
What Theosophy Is.
Theosophy, in its proper sense, does, therefore, not consist in making fine speeches, working upon people’s imagination, or stirring up their emotions, nor in doing charitable acts with a view of advancing one’s personal progress, nor in knowing a great many theories in regard to metaphysics and occult science, nor in believing this or that doctrine on the strength of the credibility of a witness; but it consists in partaking in the Divine wisdom of God, by becoming united with Him in His Divine love, where all sense of self, all personal attributes, all self-righteousness, self-morality, and conventionalism disappears. Those who cannot free themselves from the idea of “self,” may for all that be very good and moral and virtuous people; they may be very learned, eloquent speakers and admirable actors; they may imagine themselves to be in possession of truth, and others may cling to them as their leaders; but still they are not real theosophists, because a theosophist means an individual who has sacrificed his personality and entered into θεο-σοφία, the wisdom of God. Such persons, still in the clutches of self, may do a great deal of good by promulgating the doctrines they have learned from H. P. Blavatsky; but not being truly theosophists, and having no real, spiritual self-knowledge, to apply the term “theosophy” to their system is a misapplication; nor is it the object of the Masters to start a new sect or a new creed, or to convert people from one set of opinions to another set of theories; but to indicate to them the way, how each may establish conditions under which this awakening may take place through the power and influence of the holy spirit of truth.
The Mahatmas.
This brings us to another point, which is very much misunderstood inside and outside of the Theosophical Society, namely, the “Mahatmas.”
The light of divine wisdom radiates from the soul of the universe, and the spiritual soul of the universe means the sum of all great souls and spiritual intelligences that have attained to the direct recognition of eternal truth; be they incarnated in still living human forms, disincarnated as “spirits,” or existing in the selfless state of Nivana [Nirvana]. They constitute the great spiritual lodge, or what is called in Christianity “the communion of saints,” or the Sangha of the Buddhists. It is, therefore, not a question of worshipping or adulating the personalities of “Mahatmas” (great souls), but of recognising the truth that is contained in their teachings.
That which eminently distinguishes the Theosophical Society from any other body of scientific researchers or speculative philosophers, is the influence of the Mahatmas. To do away with that influence would be the same as doing away in Christianity with the influence of the Holy Ghost, for both are identical. We may do away with personal saints or personal “Mahatmas”; but we cannot progress or develop spiritually without the influence of the spirit of truth, nor are we to worship the personalities of the saints or Mahatmas, but the truth that comes through them and of which they bear witness. Such living witnesses are the personalities of the masters who taught through the mouth and pen of H. P. Blavatsky and who are still ready to teach the knowledge they have attained by their own experience through those who are capable to receive their teachings and to understand them; but as an ignorant boor worships the personalities of the saints and knows nothing of the spirit of sanctity, so there are many shortsighted people and dreamers in the Theosophical Society and among their opponents, who can grasp only the idea of personal Mahatmas, but know nothing of the spirit of wisdom that is manifested through them.
This is the key to the many misunderstandings in regard to H. P. Blavatsky and the Theosophical Society, and the cause why Theosophy is turned into theosophical tomfoolery when it comes into contact with the fool, be he inside or outside of the Theosophical Society.
The Wise Man.
Theosophy is not a matter of belief, nor a theory, nor a thing of the imagination, but a living power, to which no one can be “persuaded” or “converted,” but which one must possess. The way to arrive at it is not only the development of the intellect, but the elevation and the expansion of the soul, by which the mental horizon becomes widened, and divine love becomes a power which embraces the all of existence. This power of divine love is that which binds together not only God and man, but also the Master and his disciple. The disciple may have many imperfections, if he has only one thing in abundance, namely, unselfish love. Therefore, the masters do not select their disciples according to the degree of their self-righteousness, or according to the amount of their learning and cleverness, or according to their social position, good manners or worldly possessions; but according to the degree of unselfishness and divine love, which alone fits them for the reception of eternal truth. To such the masters will send the influence of their thoughts, and aid them in the attainment of spiritual perception of truth, while those who are not qualified for the reception of truth will remain in the realm of opinion, and liable to a continual change of system and change of mind; but eternal truth is not subject to change; it is uncreated and immortal, and those who rise to it and embrace it with their whole heart will be immortal in it—Franz Hartmann.
Hallein (Austria), May 1st, 1895.
Note:
[1] What I think of Theosophy and Theosophists. Summing Up. Franz Hartmann, M.D. Borderland 2, no. 9 (July 1895), 254-256 {This article was reformatted from the original, but with the content unchanged other than fixing minor typos, which are due more to the preparation of the press copy than to Dr. Hartmann, who probably never saw the press-ready version due to his being in Austria, by Robert Hutwohl, ©2025}