Who Was Saint Germain?

The following was published under the title “The Count de Saint-Germain” in the September 1963 issue of “The Theosophical Movement” magazine, produced by the United Lodge of Theosophists in India:

Since Tsong-kha-pa, the Tibetan Adept and World Reformer, inaugurated in the 14th century his movement for the spiritual enlightenment of humanity, including the West, members of the Adept Fraternity have attempted to give out century by century a greater or less amount of occult knowledge to a world increasingly deluded by materialism. Mesmer and other representatives of the Great Lodge functioned in the 18th century, under the guiding influence of the Count de Saint-Germain, whom H. P. Blavatsky calls “the greatest Oriental Adept Europe has seen during the last centuries” (The Theosophical Glossary). [Note: The “Theosophical Glossary” entry referred to in this article is for “St. Germain” on p. 308-309 of that book.] But Europe had neither the mental understanding nor the moral perception to evaluate correctly and derive full benefit from the labours of great ones whose aim was soul-service of fellow beings gone astray, and who had no axe of their own to grind.

Madame Blavatsky, in an article on the Count de Saint-Germain in The Theosophist of May 1881, called for the vindication of his memory and wrote: –

“The treatment this great man, this pupil of Indian and Egyptian hierophants, this proficient in the secret wisdom of the East, has had from Western writers, is a stigma upon human nature. And so has the stupid world behaved towards every other person who, like St. Germain, has revisited it after long seclusion devoted to study, with his stores of accumulated esoteric wisdom, in the hope of bettering it, and making it wiser and happier.”

The background of the Count de Saint-Germain and his true mission in life are unsolved mysteries for those who are not familiar with the modus operandi of Adepts who know what they do and silently do what they can for the true welfare of mankind. They give no thought to painful consequences accruing to themselves owing to the opposition of the men in power who, for serving their own ends and ambitions, dominate the people’s minds, to adjust and enfranchise which is the philanthropic work of the representatives of the Great Lodge. As befitted one of his kind, Saint-Germain evaded inquisitive inquiries about his age, his parentage and early life as he travelled from country to country in furtherance of his benevolent objective. H.P.B. wrote of him: –

“The Count St. Germain is, until this very time, a living mystery. . . . The countless authorities we have in literature, as well as in oral tradition (which sometimes is the more trustworthy), about this wonderful Count’s having been met and recognized in different centuries, is no myth.” (A Modern Panarion, p. 44) [Note: This particular article included in the compilation book “A Modern Panarion” is “Occultism or Magic” which was originally published under the title “A Few Questions to Hiraf.”]

The astounded people who came under his magnetic influence persisted in asking who he was that, without visible sources of income, bedecked himself with superb diamonds and gave away precious stones and jewelry as presents to his friends with as great nonchalance as that with which another would distribute trifles. He enjoyed the confidence and admiration of the cleverest statesmen and nobles of Europe for long years. However, ignorant of his true position and purpose, some jealous statesmen and ministers whom he met in the course of his unpaid missions of peace to various European Courts referred to him in their correspondence with contempt or dealt harshly with him as a spy or an impostor. In the salons which he visited he would entertain the company with weird stories of the hidden world, with himself as a witness or an actor therein, but would never break bread with anyone. His rare intellectual endowments, brilliant conversation and mysterious modes of life astounded and dazzled the public mind.

Madame Blavatsky says in The Theosophical Glossary: –

“Many are his “biographies,” and each wilder than the other. By some he was regarded as an incarnate god, by others as a clever Alsatian Jew. One thing is certain, Count de St. Germain – whatever his real patronymic may have been – had a right to his name and title, for he had bought a property called San Germano, in the Italian Tyrol, and paid the Pope for the title. . . .

“He never laid claim to spiritual powers, but proved to have a right to such claim. He used to pass into a dead trance from thirty-seven to forty-nine hours without awakening, and then knew all he had to know, and demonstrated the fact by prophesying futurity and never making a mistake. It was he who prophesied before the Kings Louis XV and XVI, and the unfortunate Marie Antoinette. . . . He was the greatest adept in transmuting metals, making gold and the most marvellous diamonds, an art, he said, he had learned from certain Brahmans in India, who taught him the artificial crystallization (“quickening”) of pure carbon.”

Borne along on the mighty tide of world Karma, the Adepts can, as they have said, only modify and direct some of its minor currents. Their motives and methods of work cannot be understood or appreciated by those outside their circle because of the lack of intuition in the latter in gauging the need of the people in terms of the mental and moral light and darkness of the prevailing period. To be misunderstood, misjudged and maligned is an Adept’s unenviable lot. We have some indication of this in the travails of our teacher Madame Blavatsky. The Count de Saint-Germain had his own share of undeserved ignominy and obloquy.

It is not known when Saint-Germain was born, and there is no data, no account in any memoir, of his death, which in the case of one who lived in the full blaze of publicity is singularly remarkable. There is, however, evidence to show that he was in Europe with long or short absences from the last quarter of the 17th century, if not earlier, to the first quarter of the 19th century. In the Glossary we read that he had claimed to be over five hundred years old. Madame Blavatsky adds that “If he said that ‘he had been born in Chaldea and professed to possess the secrets of the Egyptian magicians and sages,’ he may have spoken truth without making any miraculous claim. There are Initiates, and not the highest either, who are placed in a condition to remember more than one of their past lives.” She recorded towards the end of the 19th century that “Perchance some may recognize him at the next Terreur, which will affect all Europe when it comes, and not one country alone.” [Note: “La Terreur,” meaning “The Terror,” is the name applied to the most violent and bloody period of the French Revolution.]

There are many gaps in our knowledge of his activities. Members of the Fraternity of Adepts sedulously keep closed “every possible door of approach by which the inquisitive could spy upon them.” As one of Them has said: “The adept, to be successful and preserve his power, must dwell in solitude, and more or less within his own soul.”

From the few facts available about this great life we can say that the Count was not only an adept in the occult arts but was also the master of many physical arts and sciences. He is claimed to have known about trains and steamboats decades before these inventions came into use. Among the accomplishments ascribed to him may be mentioned the dyeing and preparation of skins, carried to a perfection which surpassed all the moroccos in the world; the dyeing of silks, woollens and wood in the most brilliant colours, etc. He played on every instrument and was said to have rivalled Paganini on the violin. He was also a painter of rare ability. He had a prodigious memory, and his enormous erudition included a thorough knowledge of nearly all the European and many Oriental languages, such as Sanskrit, Chinese and Arabic. He had travelled almost the whole world over. He is said to have given the finishing touches to the training of Mesmer, who rediscovered animal magnetism for the cure of diseases. Cagliostro, too, worked for a time under his direction. He is reported also to have collaborated with Saint-Martin in his Masonic and Theosophical work. It is said that all four of these Adepts were together at the Paris Convention of Free Masons in 1785. There are references in The Theosophical Glossary to Saint-Germain’s remarkable knowledge of early Masonry. And a Master of Wisdom has referred to the work he did for Rosicrucianism: while Christian Rosencreuz taught orally, “St. Germain recorded the good doctrines in figures.” Madame Blavatsky mentions one of his ciphered Rosicrucian manuscripts in Isis Unveiled (I. 575) and quotes at length from another in The Secret Doctrine (II. 582-83).

He could transmute iron into gold while one stood and watched. The fusing of small diamonds into large ones and removing flaws from diamonds was his specialty. But why, one may ask, did he, an Adept, decorate himself with jewelry and distribute gems all around? Can we learn something from this? Can we not take diamonds to symbolize the acme of earthly possessions, toiling for which we of the world exhaust ourselves? Even if we had diamonds in plenty they would not avail us, because material wealth is for superficial decoration and glorifying the body only, which will perish. Why not then work for a “Diamond Soul,” the deserving of which title is the final aim for which the universe exists and which is the task that claims all our skill and sacrifice, our toil and travail for eternal peace and happiness?

Historically speaking, the long period covered by the Count de Saint-Germain’s appearances was sufficiently important to make the ancient order of the Great Lodge have a witness of their own on the spot, when European nations were struggling with one another, extending their foreign possessions, and when the age-old tyranny of dogmatic religion was being challenged by the advancement in physical science. Moreover, this was the period which ushered in the French Revolution, followed by the Napoleonic Wars. The causes of the Revolution in France are too well known to need enumeration. Suffice it to cite the decadence in upper-class French society and the general failure to recognize the duty owed to the so-called lower classes, whom the nobility had long exploited.

When the Count came to Paris in 1757, with his reputation as a man of miracles, Louis XV provided him with a laboratory for his alchemical and other scientific work. The King treated him with respect and made him his confidential envoy to other European Courts. Such embassies, however, did not quite succeed in their purpose because of the weakness of the King, who could not check his Ministers when they opposed the mediation of the Count.

The Countess d’Adhemar, an intimate friend of Queen Marie Antoinette and known to Saint-Germain, left behind her memoirs, portions of which were translated and published in The Theosophist of September 1884. These memoirs give a descriptive account of the circumstances which prevented the Count from changing the course of the French Revolution before the Reign of Terror precipitated itself in all its hideousness. According to this account, several years before the fall of the Bastille, with which the Revolution started, the Count returned to Paris after a long absence, when Louis XVI was on the throne, and through the Countess d’Adhemar sought a secret interview with the Queen. In this interview Saint-Germain briefly apprised the Queen of the coming danger and requested her to persuade the King to receive him confidentially without delay.

The King, however, was too weak to act on his own and summoned his chief counsellor, Maurepas, for consultation. The latter, an ambitious and bad adviser at so critical a period, after seeing the King, called on the Countess d’Adhemar to get fuller details of the Count’s interview with the Queen and to inquire about his whereabouts so as to arrange for his arrest. The Countess records that, while she was engaged in conversation with Maurepas,

“our attention was diverted by the noise made by the opening of the door of my room. . . . It was the Comte de Saint-Germain who entered! A cry escaped me, while M. de Maurepas hurriedly rose, and I must say that his countenance changed a little. The thaumaturgist, approaching him, said:

“M. le Comte de Maurepas, the King summoned you to give him good advice, and you think only of maintaining your own authority. In opposing yourself to my seeing the monarch, you are losing the monarchy, for I have but a limited time to give to France, and this time over, I shall not be seen here again until after three consecutive generations have gone down to the grave. I told the Queen all that I was permitted to tell her; my revelations to the King would have been more complete; it is unfortunate that you should have intervened between his Majesty and me. I shall have nothing to reproach myself with when horrible anarchy devastates all France. . . .”

The Countess continues: “M. de Saint-Germain, having spoken thus without taking breath, turned towards the door again, shut it, and disappeared.” And with him also disappeared the hope of saving France, because the head of a powerful absolute monarchy felt too feeble to act for the good of his country without the consent of his crafty Ministers.

Marie Antoinette was a person for whom the Count had special regard and sympathy. Without making himself known to her, it is said, he from time to time sent her communications as her “mysterious adviser,” warning her of the dangers against which she should guard. One such communication which he sent after his unsuccessful attempt to meet the King contained the prophecy of the terrific storm and incredible madness that would follow, and which it had been his intention to explain to the King, inducing him to take timely action.

After the fall of the Bastille in 1789, when the destiny of France was sealed, the Count in a secret interview explained the limitations of his position to the Countess d’Adhemar in the following words: –

“I have written it to you, I can do nothing, my hands are tied by one stronger than myself. There are periods of time when to retreat is impossible, others when He has pronounced and the decree will be executed. Into this we are entering.”

[Note: Lest any Christian-minded Theosophists or others read into this a reference to Jesus, we know from Prince Karl von Hesse, referred to below, with whom Saint Germain was closely acquainted, that the latter “was by no means an adorer of Jesus Christ” and that his remarks about Jesus were deemed “offensive” by the Prince, which resulted in Saint Germain promising not to discuss the subject with him again. In HPB’s “Theosophical Glossary” entry for “St. Germain” she relates that some people reported that “he claimed personal intimacy “with the Saviour and his twelve Apostles, . . .” and concludes “we have good reason to know that St. Germain could never have claimed “personal intimacy” with the Saviour.” What that “good reason” is, is not divulged but the wording bespeaks direct knowledge on the part of HPB and her Adept-Teachers with regard to the real facts regarding both St. Germain and Jesus. The “He” mentioned by St. Germain most likely refers to a Master of even higher grade and role than St. Germain himself and perhaps even to that Being described in The Great Sacrifice & The Mystery-Land of Shambhala.]

Later, the Queen received a further communication from her “mysterious adviser,” in which he stated: “It is no longer a question of tacking but of meeting the storm with thundering energy.”

Louis XVI was beheaded in January 1793 after a mock trial. In October of the same year the Queen was put up for trial and guillotined immediately afterward. The Countess d’Adhemar records that the Count de Saint-Germain was present in Paris at the time of the execution of the Queen. The Queen did not belie the hope of her “mysterious adviser” and faced the ordeal of an outrageous trial and death with “thundering energy.” Thomas Carlyle, in his French Revolution, bears testimony to the dignity and calm with which the Queen carried herself right up to the end, unconscious of the higher influence exerted over her in easing the tragic situation of her last days.

The following, which continues on from this point, is an excerpt from an article in the “Great Theosophists” series, titled “The Count de St. Germain,” from the November 1938 issue of “Theosophy” magazine, published by the United Lodge of Theosophists in Los Angeles, California, USA:

The Countess inquired if she would see him again. “Five times more,” he answered. “Do not wish for the sixth.”

True to his word, the Count de St. Germain appeared to the Countess d’Adhemar on five different occasions: at the beheading of the Queen; on the 18th Brumaire; the day following the death of the Duc d’Enghien in 1804; in January, 1813; on the eve of the assassination of the Duc de Berri in 1820. Presumably, the sixth time was on the day of her death, in 1822.

What happened to the Count de St. Germain after that date? Did he, as Andrew Lang asks, “die in the palace of Prince Karl von Hesse about 1780-85? Did he, on the other hand, escape from the French prison where Grosley thought he saw him, during the French Revolution? Was he known to Lord Lytton about 1860? Who knows?” Who, indeed. One of the Masters spoke of the “benevolent German Prince from whose house, and in whose presence he (St. Germain) made his last exit – home.”

In the last decade of the eighteenth century St. Germain confided his future plans to his Austrian friend, Franz Graeffer, saying,

“Tomorrow night I am off. I am much needed in Constantinople, then in England, there to prepare two new inventions which you will have in the next century – trains and steamboats. Toward the end of this century I shall disappear out of Europe, and betake myself to the region of the Himalayas. I will rest; I must rest. Exactly in 85 years will people again set eyes on me. Farewell.” (Kleine Wiener Memoiren.)

These words were spoken in 1790. Eighty-five years from that date brings us to 1875. What part did St. Germain play in the Theosophical Movement of last century? What part is he going to play in the present century?

[Note: Franz Gräffer’s statement is of particular importance and relevance to students of Theosophy. If it had been written after the modern Theosophical Movement was founded in 1875 by H. P. Blavatsky, assisted by William Q. Judge and Col. Henry Olcott, it could be easily argued that Gräffer was a Theosophist who made up the quote from his own imagination in order to make HPB and her work, including its mentions of a Trans-Himalayan Brotherhood, appear more important and legitimate. But this is not the case. Gräffer published those words in 1843, 32 years before the founding of our Movement and long before the world had heard of HPB, who was only 12 years old at that time. It should be noted, however, that HPB and her co-founders never claimed that Saint Germain was one of the Masters and Inspirers working behind the scenes of the Movement. That doesn’t mean that he was not doing so but there is no evidence available to support or even imply it. If the words quoted by Gräffer are indeed an accurate quotation, it will be noted that Saint Germain said “Exactly in 85 years will people again set eyes on me.” This does not suggest working unseen in the background but being seen by the public and working again in the world at large. Some have taken this to imply that the inner HPB may have been that same great “Oriental Adept” who had occupied and worked through the body and persona known as “Saint Germain.” This may not be the case at all; however, it is certainly the case that the real and inner HPB was a great Eastern Adept, as shown with numerous references in Who are you, Madame Blavatsky? HPB, unlike some of her self-proclaimed “successors,” strictly adhered to the wise occult rule of never divulging details of any of her previous incarnations.]

H.P.B. gave a cryptic suggestion of the time when he would again appear:

“The Count de St. Germain was certainly the greatest Oriental Adept Europe has seen during the last centuries. But Europe knew him not. Perchance some may recognize him at the next Terreur, which will affect all Europe when it comes, and not one country alone.”

Was the event of which she spoke the last great War, or does the real Terreur still lie before us?

**~ * ~**

SAINT GERMAIN IN NEO-THEOSOPHY
AND THE NEW AGE MOVEMENT

This article is by no means a complete study and exposition of Le Comte de Saint Germain; that would require a full length book and indeed there have been several books written, some good, some bad, some a mixture of the two.

We cannot close this article, however, without briefly making mention of the many uses and abuses of the name and character of St. Germain in today’s popular New Age spirituality.

This began in the 1930s when Guy Ballard, an American con man with a long history of fraud, published a book in which he purported to have met “The Ascended Master Saint Germain” in temporarily materialised form on Mount Shasta, California. This began the “Ascended Masters” movement, which started with the organisation he then founded, named “The I AM Activity.”

After his death the same claims and concepts would be taken up and further developed by Geraldine Innocente and “The Bridge to Freedom,” Mark and Elizabeth Clare Prophet of “The Summit Lighthouse”/“Church Universal and Triumphant,” and a myriad of others, ranging from high profile speakers with a following of tens of thousands to unknown psychics promulgating their claims and channellings to paltry audiences on Facebook, YouTube, and obscure websites.

In the February 1936 issue of “Theosophy,” at a time when the Ballards and their group were gaining in popularity, influence, and wealth, an article was published titled “St. Germain in Masquerade,” in which, amongst other things, the ULT associates wrote:

“It may not be hard to see some reasons why that courtly gentleman and high Adept of the eighteenth century should have become the target for twentieth century spiritualistic exploitation and commercial advertising. For one thing, he was “the greatest (Americans always like superlatives) Oriental Adept Europe has seen during the last centuries.” Besides, he is near enough in time to seem humanly close, yet far enough to be easily romanticized. General history, knowing nothing of Adepts, leaves him conveniently vague. Biographies of him are full of wild stories of adventure, well calculated to inspire superstitious credulity, . . . Hence a modicum of learning about the man himself, about eighteenth century America and ancient Atlantis, plus a large degree of psychic imagination are producing for his present partners very satisfactory results. Using the word Master as a trump card is clever, for without that word the old spiritualism might be too easily detected. The intriguing suggestion conveyed by the word “Ascended” is a trump card to win the curious and the gullible.

“This latest spiritualism borrows its very effective features from the most successful business of the day – advertising. “Descended” Master Count St. Germain does not appear “in person,” but stories are told by his able managers that keep eyes stretched and mouths agape, – stories claiming connection in former lives of the “Master” and the manager. This lures not only curiosity-seekers, but some honestly in search of satisfying truth. Some who have heard of but never investigated genuine Theosophy are caught by claimed signs and wonders. Moreover, to the general audience, gathered free, there is offered the further lure of “instruction” – exercises bringing “occult” results, personal proofs and “experiences,” by means of the select advanced circles, to which a sufficient fee commands entrance. In these seances the “Master” himself is the “control” and speaks through his “chosen vessels.” Think of possibly hearing His voice, and all this merely for a sufficient fee.”

Contrary to pervasive misunderstandings and misinformation, it was neither H. P. Blavatsky nor the Theosophical Movement which started the notion of “Ascended Masters.”

In Theosophy it is strongly maintained that the Masters are not “Ascended Masters” – disembodied and living in higher realms, like saints or angels, as maintained by the “Ascended Masters” followers – but are physically incarnated, in physical mortal bodies, right here on this physical plane, for they have important work to do in this world, although they do tend to dwell in solitary locations away from the often toxic influences of modern everyday life. Hence the “Theosophy” magazine’s suggestion that the term “Ascended” was added on as a 20th century marketing tactic.

As might be expected, the “Ascended Master Saint Germain” is remarkably different from the real and historical Count Saint Germain.

The “Ascended Masters” believers, following Guy Ballard in this, pronounce his name “Saynt Jermayne.” Whether this is due to a wish to Christianise him into a sort of neo-saint or due simply to lack of familiarity with French pronunciation (i.e. “San Jermān”) is not clear.

Many of our readers are probably already familiar with the pictures and portraits of this fictitious entity that are produced and distributed (usually in exchange for specific sums of money) by “Ascended Masters” believers, as also with the usually very Christianised and astral/psychic nature of “his” teachings, and some of their distinctly untheosophical concepts and practices such as using “The Violet Flame of Saint Germain” in ultra-fast verbal “decrees” as a means of burning away one’s unexpended negative Karma so as to avoid and erase the future suffering that one has Karmically created for oneself.

They say that when one has successfully erased 51% of their backlog of Karma through the Violet Flame, one becomes an “Ascended Master” oneself. Guy Ballard, his wife Edna, and all the subsequent high profile figures in that Movement, are claimed to have become “Ascended Masters” after their death and have thus joined the vast and fantastical pantheon, spearheaded by “Saint Germain,” that is channelled, worshipped, prayed to, and sung to, by thousands of sincere but deluded souls all over the world.

Yet the seeds of today’s New Age obsession with this purported “Saint Germain” were sown by a prominent member of “The Theosophical Society – Adyar,” namely C. W. Leadbeater. Leadbeater, along with Annie Besant, was responsible for producing a new and very different version of “Theosophy” after the passing of H. P. Blavatsky and William Q. Judge. This has been discussed in other articles on this site such as Original Theosophy and Later Versions, The “Etheric” Body Does Not Exist, Christos – The Christ Principle, Theosophy, The Jesuits, & The Roman Catholic Church, Theosophy Warns Against Ceremonial Magic, and The Case against C. W. Leadbeater.

There are four different and independent branches or streams of the modern Theosophical Movement and of these only one has accepted and promoted the Leadbeater/Besant version of “Theosophy,” which critics have labelled “Neo-Theosophy” and “Pseudo-Theosophy,” namely the Adyar Theosophical Society. But as that Society is the largest and most well known of all the Theosophical groups, the Leadbeater/Besant teachings have similarly become well known, even more so than the vast original system presented by HPB and her closest colleague and friend Mr Judge.

Almost all the Leadbeater/Besant innovations were subsequently promoted and perpetuated by their follower and admirer Alice Bailey (an Adyar Society member) in the many books she published after starting her own organisation, the Lucis Trust.

Twenty or more years after HPB’s death, Leadbeater published his first description of the appearance and details of a purported Adept who he named the “Master R.” (R. standing for Rakoczy or Racokzy) and who he claimed had previously been the Count de Saint Germain along with many other historical figures such as Francis Bacon, Roger Bacon, and Saint Alban. He claimed to have personally met him and to be in occult communication with him.

This “Master R.” was described by Leadbeater and Besant as being the “Chohan of the Seventh Ray.” According to them, humanity is now entering into the evolutionary period of the Seventh Ray, which they say revolves around the influence of Ceremonial Magic. The necessity and potency of Ceremonial Magic will increase, wrote Leadbeater and Besant, and must be promoted and encouraged, including in the Christian Church and in various so-called “Theosophical rites.” This is markedly antithetical to the original Theosophical teachings, as can be seen in Theosophy Warns Against Ceremonial Magic.

Alice Bailey repeated all of this but went on to add that in 1925 the “Master R.” had taken over the role and position of the Maha Chohan (from an ever-youthful Indian man, not from the real Maha Chohan – the elderly Tibetan Buddhist Adept spoken of by HPB and the Mahatmas as Head of the Trans-Himalayan Brotherhood; the existence of the actual Maha Chohan known to HPB and the Masters is denied in Neo-Theosophy and declared to be mistaken!) and become “The Lord of Civilisation.”

A fake photograph which seems to show “Master R.” standing behind HPB, alongside the Masters M. and K.H., has unfortunately become very popular online and is used by both Pseudo-Theosophists and “Ascended Masters” followers; this has been addressed in our article The Fake Photo.

Just a few years after Bailey’s death in 1949 (see Tibetan Master or Christian Priest? Uncovering the real inspiration behind the Alice Bailey Books and 14 Good Reasons To Question The Alice Bailey Teachings) a woman named Lucille Cedercrans began producing a series of books which she described as telepathic dictations from the “Master R.” Her books are so extremely similar in style, wording, tone, and content, to the Alice Bailey books, that it would seem more reasonable – especially if one reads the Tibetan Master or Christian Priest? article to its end – to assume that they were actually dictated and inspired by the same unseen being who took on the name and identity of “the Tibetan, Djwhal Khul” for the purpose of dictating and inspiring the anti-theosophical Bailey teachings.

It is not difficult to see how the raising to such high prominence of “St. Germain/Master R.” by Leadbeater, Besant, and Bailey, could provide basis and inspiration for a similar type of thing by the Ballards and the “Ascended Masters” movements, beginning only a few years afterwards.

A truly tragic state of affairs and so widespread and pervasive in spiritual and esoteric circles that it could even be considered detrimental to humanity’s right spiritual unfoldment and evolution. But thankfully more and more people are now becoming acquainted with the historical and philosophical facts. In light of all this misinformation it seems even more important than ever to draw attention to the information HPB gave out regarding the real Saint Germain.

We close with these words from a letter sent to German Theosophist Dr Hubbe-Schleiden in November 1890 by William Q. Judge:

“If the philosophy of the occult hierarchies is correct then They must all be interested in each part of the whole family of people on the earth. I have always believed, and on the dictum of H P B, that St Germain was so interested and she intimated to me that he is not dead at all.”