“For all that the recipient of “occult” letters can possibly know, and on the simple grounds of probability and common honesty, the unseen correspondent who would tolerate one single fraudulent line in his name, would wink at an unlimited repetition of the deception. And this leads directly to the following. All the so-called occult letters being supported by identical proofs, they have all to stand or fall together. If one is to be doubted, then all have, … The whole difficulty springs from the common tendency to draw conclusions from insufficient premises, and play the oracle before ridding oneself of that most stupefying of all psychic anaesthetics – IGNORANCE.”
– H.P. Blavatsky, “Lodges of Magic”
If the Masters ever allowed or permitted HPB to insert “one single fraudulent line” or interpolation of her own into even one of the numerous letters she transmitted from them and on their behalf, then those Masters are not to be trusted and their sense of honesty, integrity, and decency is to be severely doubted and questioned. If she ever did such a thing, then we should expect the Masters to have said so and to have made it clear in some way that she was not being entirely proper or reliable in her duties and that some of the letters issued under their names and signatures should be viewed as questionable.
But do we ever find anywhere even the slightest hint of this, from any of the Masters? No…nowhere…never. On the contrary, they speak of her as their “Direct Agent,” say that there is no chance of them finding a better one and that Theosophists should always remember this, call her their “Brother,” urge her colleagues not to doubt or mistrust her, and certify her teachings – including the entirety of “The Secret Doctrine” – as their own.
Theosophists therefore have only two real options: (1) to view the whole thing about Masters as a fraud and a sham concocted by HPB, or (2) to take the Masters at their word. There is no middle ground in a situation like this.
Those who like to cast aspersions against the Letters attributed to the Masters – such as the supposedly controversial “Prayag Letter” and the one in which They emphatically deny the existence of God – and against HPB are invariably those whose personal religious sensibilities happen to have been offended or challenged by them and who are so astoundingly conceited that they literally can’t – or don’t want to – accept that the Masters could possibly hold to any views so contrary to their own. To use a term coined by HPB herself, these people are not true Theosophists but “Pseudo-Theosophists” and cause nothing but damage to the Cause of genuine Theosophy and the Theosophical Movement.
In “H.P. Blavatsky on Precipitation and Other Matters,” she writes:
“You and the Theosophists have come to the conclusion that in every case where a message was found couched in words or sentiments unworthy of Mahatmas it was produced either by elementals or my own falsification. Believing the latter, no honest man or woman ought for one moment to permit me, such a FRAUD, to remain any longer in the Society. It is not a piece of repentance and a promise that I shall do so no longer that you need, but to kick me out – if you really think so. You believe, you say, in the Masters, and at the same time you can credit the idea that They should permit or even know of it and still use me! Why, if They are the exalted Beings you rightly suppose Them to be, how could They permit or tolerate for one moment such a deception and fraud? Ah, poor Theosophists – little you do know the occult laws I see. … Before you volunteer to serve the Masters you should learn Their philosophy, for otherwise you shall always sin grievously, though unconsciously and involuntarily, against Them and those who serve Them, soul and body and spirit.”
We hope all this will provide some food for thought for the students and followers of Alice Bailey, Annie Besant, C.W. Leadbeater, Geoffrey Hodson, and others who have done their best to lead their readers into something which is quite patently very different from real Theosophy and the actual teachings of the actual Masters, who assert that “Our doctrine knows no compromises,” “Truth is One and cannot admit of diametrically opposite views,” “We have no two beliefs or hypotheses on any subject,” and “Occult Philosophy has its changeless traditions from prehistoric times.”
We ought to refer the reader to the new article On The Publication and Use of “The Mahatma Letters” where it is demonstrated that the Masters were in fact strongly opposed to their letters ever being published, in the way that they finally were after A.P. Sinnett’s death. However, while we will not defend the publication of the book itself, it remains our duty and responsibility to defend the good name and nature of the Masters and their Direct Agent.
~ Blavatsky Theosophy Group UK ~
You may also like to read On The Publication and Use of “The Mahatma Letters”, The Masters and Madame Blavatsky, Words from The Masters about H.P. Blavatsky, The Final Mahatma Letter, The Letter from the Maha Chohan, Damodar and the Hall of Initiation, and Who are you, Madame Blavatsky?