An Interesting Letter
(Written to an Indian Brother)
144 Madison Avenue
New York
Dear Brother, -I have your last long and welcome letter. The
fears you express of the T.S. leading to dogmatism or fanaticism
seem to be groundless to me. If we had a creed there would be
danger; if the Society declared any particular doctrine to be
true, or to be the accepted view of the T.S., great danger would
result. But we have no creed, and the T.S. has not declared for
any doctrine. Its members have asserted certain beliefs, but
that is their right. They do not force them on others. Their
declaration of their own beliefs does not unfit them to be members.
I have my own settled beliefs, but I do not say that another
must accept these. The eternal duty of right thought, act, and
speech, is not affected by my theories. Hence all I ask of another
is, to do his own duty and let me do mine. Such, indeed is the
very genius of our Society, and that is the very reason why it
still lives and has an influence.
And when we come to examine the work and the foundation of
the T.S. and its policy, I find it perfectly proper for me to
assert, as I do, in accordance with my own knowledge and belief,
that our true progress lies in fidelity to Masters as ideals
and facts. Likewise is it perfectly proper for another to say
that he dose not know anything about the Masters-if such be his
case-but is willing to work in and for the T.S. But he has no
right to go further and deny my privilege of asserting my belief
in those Beings.
So also further; I have the right to say that I think a constant
reliance on Masters as such ideals and facts-or either-will lead
the T.S. on to greater work. And he has his right to say that
he can work without that reliance. But neither has he nor have
you any right to say that my belief in this, or any assertion
of it, is wrong or in any way improper.
I belong to that class of person in the T.S. who out of their
own experience know that the Masters exist and actually help
the T.S. You belong to a class which-as I read your letters and
those of others who write similarly-express a doubt on this,
that, or the other, seeming to question the expediency, propriety
and wisdom of a man's boldly asserting confidence and belief
in Beings who are unprovable for many, although you say (as in
your present letter) that you believe in and revere the same
Masters as I do. What, then, must I conclude? Am I not forced
to the conclusion that inasmuch as you say you believe in these
Beings, you think it unwise in me to assert publicly and boldly
my belief? Well, then, if this is a correct statement of the
case, why cannot you go on your way of belief and concealment
of it, and let me proceed with proclamations? I will take the
Karma of my own beliefs. I force no man to accept my assertions.
But I am not acting impulsively in my many public statements
as tot he existence of Masters and help from Them. It is done
upon an old order of Theirs and under a law of mind. The existence
of Masters being a fact, the assertion of that fact made
so often in America has opened up channels in men's minds which
would have remained closed had silence been observed about the
existence of those Beings. The giving out of names is
another matter; that, I do not sanction nor practise. Experience
has shown that a springing up of interest in Theosophy has followed
declaration, and men's minds are more and more powerfully drawn
away from the blank Materialism which is rooted in English, French,
and German teaching. And the Masters have said "It is easier
to help in America than Europe because in the former our existence
has been persistently declared by so many." You may, perhaps,
call this a commonplace remark, as you do some others, but for
me it has a deep significance and contains a high endorsement.
A very truism when uttered by a Mahatma has a deeper meaning
for which the student must seek, but which he will lose if he
stops to criticize and weigh the words in mere ordinary scales.
Now, I may as well say it out very plainly that the latter
half of your letter in which you refer to a message printed in
the Path in 1891 in August is the part you consider of
most importance. To that part of your letter you gave the most
attention, and to the same portion you wish for a reply more
than to the preliminary pages. Now, on the contrary, I consider
the preceding half of your letter the important half. This last
bit, all about the printed message, is not important at all.
Why? Because your basic facts are wrong.
(1) I never published such a letter, for I was not in America,
although if I had been I should have consented. In August of
that year I was in Europe, and did not get back to New York until
after that month's Path was published. I had sailed for
London May 13th, on hearing of H.P.B.'s death, and stayed there
three months. Of course while away I had to leave all the publishing
in the hands of Bro. Fullerton and others. But I do approve their
work.
(2)The next baseless fact is thus smashed: I did not write
the article you quote. I am not Jasper Niemand. Hence I did not
get the message he printed a part of in his article. Jasper
Niemand is a real person and not a title to conceal my person.
If you wish to write him about the article, or any other, you
can address care of me; I will forward; in time he will reply.
This wrong notion about Jasper ought to be exposed. People choose
now and then to assume that I am the gentleman. But several who
have corresponded with him know that he is as distinct from me
in person, place, and mind as you are yourself.
(3)Now, in July it was that Jasper Niemand got his message
containing, I believe, things relative to himself, and also the
words of general interest quoted by him. The general words he
saw fit to use. Having had privilege to send his articles to
Path, which accepts them without examination, his article
was used at once without it being necessary for me to see it,
for my orders were to print any he might send. Hence I saw neither
the article nor proofs before publication. But I fully approve
now as I did when, in the next September, I read it.
It is true I had later the privilege of seeing his message,
but only read the text, did not examine the signature, and do
not remember if even it had a signature. The signature is not
important. The means for identification are not located in signatures
at all. If you have not the means yourself for proving and identifying
such a message, then signature seal, papers, watermarks, what
not, all are useless.
As the "Master's seal," about which you put me the
question, I do not know. Whether He has a seal or sues one is
something in which I am ignorant. In my experience I have had
messages from the Master, but they bear no seal and I attach
no significance to the point. A seal on other messages of His
goes for nothing with me; the presence or absence of a seal is
nothing to me; my means of proof and identification are within
myself and everything else is trumpery-your question, I say in
reply that I have no recollection as to any signature or seal
on this message to Jasper Niemand, because I read it but once.
Further, I think it a useful message. The qualities spoken
of were more than ever needed at that crisis, and words of encouragement
from Masters, however trite, were useful and stimulating. We
do not-at least I do not- want Masters to utter veiled, mystical,
or portentous phrases. The commonplace ones suit me best and
are best understood. Perhaps, if you were satisfied with simple
words from Them you might have had them. Who knows? They have
written much of high import, enough for fifty years of effort
in the letters published by Mr. Sinnett in the Occult World,
and attributed to K.H. Why should one desire private messages
in addition? I do not. Some men would sell their lives for the
most commonplace phrase from Masters.
But as Masters are still living in bodies, and that in your
own country and not so far from you as I am. I consider you privileged
in, so to say, breathing the same air with those exalted personages.
Yet I know beyond doubt or cavil that we, so far away, are not
exempt from Masters' care and help. Knowing this we are content
to "wait, to work, and to hope."
Fraternally
William Q. Judge
P.S.-Perhaps I ought to say somewhat more fully that the message
in Path from Master, had, in my judgment, far more value than
you attribute to it. There are in this Section many members who
need precisely its assurance that no worker, however feeble or
insignificant, is outside the range of Master's eye and help.
My co-workers in New York were so impressed with the value to
the Section of this particular message, that one of them paid
the cost of printing it on slips and sending it to every member
of the Section in good standing. Of course its worth and importance
are better understood here than they can be by anyone not familiar
with the Section and I can see ample justification of the Master's
wisdom in sending the words He did.
Lucifer, April 1893
Theosophy.org Home | up
| top |