“Theosophical Utterances”
Sir,—Will you kindly permit the undersigned members of the Theosophical Society, to say a few words concerning the existence and status of the Brothers of our First Section, whom we are proud to see associated with us in our cause, and whom we shall always be proud to look up to, though you and your correspondents like the self-styled “Adept,” (heaven save the mark!) “J. K.” may ever so vehemently ignore their very existence, or at best to pass them by, with the flippant sneer,—“Oh, they are deceitful lazy beggars—at best mediums?” You are scarcely justified in asserting that Colonel Olcott is the only testimony to “support his colleague.” Such an assertion, so naively made, must not go unchallenged. We, too, have seen the Brothers, and know something about them. But the little we know is more than we can reveal. But we will say that the Brothers are no more “ disembodied spirits” than yourself or the sage “J. K.;” but our personal experience has enabled us to perceive that, though men and mortal like us, a lifelong course of self-sacrifice, devotion to the highest and purest aspirations, and a complete psychic training, all these, we repeat, have enabled them to rise above the ordinary conditions of humanity, and surrounding themselves with their own self-chosen conditions to perform what are vulgarly termed “miracles,” or what with you pass for “spiritual phenomena” as exhibited through strong physical mediumship.
One of us, Moorad Alee Bey, knew the Brothers even before he joined the Theosophical Society. He has seen them, conversed with them, and has had other relations with them before as well as after joining the Society, but more than that (being under obligation as all of us are) he is not at liberty to say. Mr. Damodar K. Mavalankar, Joint Recording Secretary of the Theosophical Society, has repeatedly seen them, talked to them, even when Madame Blavatsky was far away in Northern India, and he at the headquarters at Bombay. He has been at the residences of some of them, and on one occasion in company with Madame Blavatsky and Colonel Olcott. Ana both Moorad Alee Bey and Mr. Damodar K. Mavalankar know “Koot Hoomi” personally. The rest have also seen some other Brothers on various occasions. We have stated the whole truth. Further than that, those of us who know and are preparing for further initiation, having devoted their lives to that highest goal, are not at liberty to disclose. The Spiritualists may dogmatise as much as they will. We Hindus, Parsees, and Mahomedans of India, like our forefathers ages ago, know of the existence of Raj “Yogis who are neither Hath Yogis nor mediums; and who, notwithstanding the denials of the sceptics, do mostly reside in the Himalayas and beyond.
Your obedient Servants, R. Moorad Alee Bey, President of the Saorashtr Theosophical Society at Bhaunagar. Damodar K. Mavalankar, Joint Recording Secretary, Central Theosophical Society. Martaudrow Babajee Nagnath, Treasurer, Bombay Theosophical Society. Bhavanishankar Ganesh Mullapoorcar, F.T.S. Sohrab Jamasp Padshah.
Assist. Recording Secretary Central Theosophical Society.Bombay, 13th July, 1881.
P.S.—As we were reading the foregoing over, a “Brother” was with us. Monsieur and Madame Coulomb, the latter Assistant Corresponding Secretary of the Central Theosophical Society, have seen him and will testify to the same.
The above Postscript is correct.
An Adept on “The Occult Brothers”
“Ahura-Madza created the creatures very good, very furthering, very lefty, that they might make the world progressive, not growing old, net dying, not becoming corrupt and stinking, but eve£iiving, ever-profiting—a kingdom as one wishes it; that the dead may arise, and there may come immortality for the living, which furthers the world at will.”—From the Aoesta, Bleeek’s Trans.
Sir,—As a Parsee, I have quoted above my own Scriptures to define in the words of Zoroaster, himself the Head of the venerable Magi and an “Occult Brother” of his time, the position of the Adepts, who have linked their interests with those of the Theosophical Society. The captious criticism of “J. K.” in your issue of 24th June last, is a very good illustration of the “Sir Oracle” type of dogged wisdom, which snarls and barks at the luminary which serenely shines in its sphere with steady mellow lustre. “J. K.” is an “Adept”—a very great Adept at putting down the law from his “safe retreat,” and from the “Himalayas which he constantly carries about with him”—in his breeches pocket. And, seriously, he may be an Adept in Christian Kabbalism; and thus only I can understand the position he has chosen to take up in regard to the Theosophical Society, and to the “Brothers” in particular. He pretends to have made “attentive enquiries,” and to have found that the “majority of the Yogis are deceitful lazy beggars.” Does “J. K.” know what he is about? Is he sure he is not uttering a great calumny? Have his enquiries been personally directed? Does he not judge from the reports of ignorant Indian missionaries and irresponsible officials, who are perversely blind, because they will not see? I am much afraid that “J. K.” has permitted himself to be hoaxed.
He writes after having made “enquiries:” allow me, Sir, to reply from personal knowledge. Perhaps your “Adept” is not aware that there are two classes of Yogis, those who have practised Hati-Yog, and those who have practised Raj-Yog. With the former, the majority of whom are not “lazy deceitful beggars,” but who have attained to extraordinary powers by physical means alone, the Theosophical Society has nothing to do. But the Raji Yogis—the “Brothers” of our Society,—have little in common with the others, are scrupulously clean in attire, and I challenge “J. K.” to roam the world over and discover a finer set of men. It has long been recognised as a truism that the features are moulded by passions and thoughts, and a look at the “Brothers,” at their long flowing hair, the dark full eyes, the sensitive and delicately chiselled lips, the majesty of their mien—to look at them, I say, is to acknowledge a superior presence, a something divine, a something beyond the pale of our ordinary worldly existence. Does “J. K.” look like one of these, as he is an Adept? Does he think it is so very easy to preserve purity in a hot bed of contamination? I do not know if his Christian Kabbalism has rendered him impervious to the effects of poison. It looks like it, since his Adeptship has enabled him to defy all the magnetic virulence of the modern Babylon. It is either consummate conceit or consummate ignorance, which is the same thing.
I emphatically protest against your Adept’s attempt to father “slave-magic” and “black-magic” on our Brothers. He has no warrant to do so. It is a gratuitous aspersion, which can mislead only people out of the pale of the Theosophical Society. Can magic be used to no higher purpose than healing disease, and glorifying Goa from year’s end to year’s end? Healing disease is a noble vocation, but is it the only noble one? “J. K.” confronts the Brothers with Jesus. Very well. His miracles, half-a-dozen in number, were mostly confined to healing disease, I grant. This by no means proves that all his life he devoted to the cure of disease. Far from it. His work was almost exclusively devoted to the political and social regeneration of the Hebrews. From being a mere esoteric Occultist, he became a worldly agitator. He emerged from his “safe retreat” of the mountain and the desert. And the result? He lost his Occult powers—death, premature death stared him in the face and he was—crucified! If the Bible is a genuine history, then this version of the life and failure of Jesus is equally genuine. Next time, let “J. K.” think twice before he carps at the Brothers for their inaccessible abode in the Himalayas.
Bombay, 17th July, 1881.
The Alleged Himalayan Secret Society
In another column are some letters signed by a few; Indian natives, and by one name which appears to be? French, setting forth that they have seen some of the alleged “Brothers,” whose teachings, according to Mr. Sinnett, the Theosophical Society exists to promulgate.
Are these witnesses in the same position as ourselves in having had a visit from one who said he was an adept? If we admit that, what does it amount to?
Such visits and such statements would not prove that he and Madame Blavatsky could between them produce and govern the phenomena of modern Spiritualism. Experimental demonstrations, as carefully recorded and verified as those appertaining to the phenomena of physical mediumship, are necessary to those who do not wish to live by faith where it is possible to live by sight.
<... continues on page 11-204 >
Editor's notes
- ↑ “Theosophical Utterances” by Coulomb E., F.T.S., Coulomb As., F.T.S., London Spiritualist, No. 469, August 19, 1881, pp. 88-9
- ↑ An Adept on “The Occult Brothers” by Padshah, Sohrab J., London Spiritualist, No. 469, August 19, 1881, p. 89
- ↑ The Alleged Himalayan Secret Society by unknown author, London Spiritualist, No. 469, August 19, 1881, p. 95
Sources
-
London Spiritualist, No. 469, August 19, 1881, pp. 88-9
-
London Spiritualist, No. 469, August 19, 1881, p. 89
-
London Spiritualist, No. 469, August 19, 1881, p. 95