Note:[1]
My dear Judge:
Having just read the February number of Lucifer containing the statements of Mr. Mead, Bert. Keightly, and others, I am impressed to write to you the following.
If Theosophy (divine wisdom or spiritual self-knowledge) were a system of creeds, and the “Theosophical Society” with its officers something like a church council in which the members sit and dispute what belief or opinion they ought to adopt, the reasons stated by Mr. Mead might have some weight. If judging about spiritual or internal matters were to depend upon external evidences and appearances and not upon direct seeing and knowing, we might then weigh all the pro’s and con’s of that evidence and form to our own satisfaction a conclusion as to which of the parties may be right. Such a conclusion, however, having been arrived at by the consideration of mere appearances, would itself be merely an appearance of knowledge and no real knowledge at all; for that which only seems to be true and is not known to be true, is not a real knowledge of truth, and if mistaken for such it constitutes a delusion.
Now the very first thing which Sankarâchârya taught, and the very first thing, which the Masters taught through H. P. Blavatsky, was that those who wish to become theosophists (i.e., to obtain self-knowledge) must learn to distinguish between the real and the mere seeming; between real knowledge and guesswork made up from inferences. The same doctrine has also been repeated and preached by the very persons who now come forth and show that they have nothing to rely upon except external evidence for proving the accusations against you, and that they have nothing else to rely upon, not being in possession of real knowledge; and as the possession of real knowledge is the only thing that constitutes a real theosophist, they, having no real knowledge, prove themselves by their own words to be no real theosophists.
We all know that those people who have real knowledge, i.e., direct spiritual perception, are few and far between, while the vast majority of human beings are led in their judgment only by suppositions and inferences, drawn from the delusive testimony of their senses and from logical deductions of phenomena whose internal causes they do not understand. For this reason it is not surprising that even among the so-called “leaders” in the T.S. there are so many who judge by appearances and have no real internal recognition of truth. When the time arrives for them to awaken to that spiritual recognition, they will regret the blunders which they made while they were spiritually blind.
To me it seems that the present crisis in the T.S. will have a most salutary effect in separating the wheat from the chaff and shaking the self-assurance of a certain class of people who fancied themselves to be the keepers and distributers of divine wisdom, while in reality they had not yet obtained the power to distinguish the permanent from the impermanent, the true from the false.
The theosophical teachings may be good for the masses, but Theosophy, i.e., spiritual self-knowledge, will necessarily always belong only to those who have found the Master, their own divine Self ; those who do not know their real Self do not know it; this is a truth which is self-evident and which no one can dispute.
The existence of a spiritual power can only be proved spiritually, and not by any external evidence; and for this reason it was in vain that the crucified Christ was asked to descend from the cross for the purpose of proving that he was a god. If he had descended, it would merely have proved that he had the power to do so.
My conviction is that the T.S. needs a leader who has obtained a certain amount of Self-knowledge. My conviction that you have found the Master, the Self, is not based upon any external evidence, but upon the direct recognition of a truth that has been shown to me, and I therefore say: Do not resign!
Yours very sincerely,
F. Hartmann.
Hallein, February 18, 1895.
Note:
[1] Correspondence. Letter to the Editor of The Path. Dr. Hartmann on the Crisis. The Path 10, no. 1 (April 1895), 17-19. Culled by Robert Hutwohl.