Jump to content

Blavatsky H.P. - Parting Words from Madame Blavatsky: Difference between revisions

Blavatsky H.P. - Parting Words from Madame Blavatsky (view source)

Revision as of 09:12, 31 May 2025

80 bytes added ,  31 May 2025
m
no edit summary
mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:
  | pages        = 393-395
  | pages        = 393-395
  | publications = Religio-Philosophical Journal. Chicago, Vol. XXIV, July 6. 1878, p. 2
  | publications = Religio-Philosophical Journal. Chicago, Vol. XXIV, July 6. 1878, p. 2
  | scrapbook    = 7:169-70
  | scrapbook    = 7:169-170
  | previous    = Blavatsky H.P. - Letter to the Editor of “L’Opinione Nazionale” (And English Translantion thereof)
  | previous    = Blavatsky H.P. - Letter to the Editor of “L’Opinione Nazionale” (And English Translantion thereof)
  | next        = Blavatsky H.P. - La Véritable Madame H. P. Blavatksy
  | next        = Blavatsky H.P. - La Véritable Madame H. P. Blavatksy
  | alternatives = [http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v1/y1878_031.htm KH]; [https://universaltheosophy.com/hpb/parting-words-from-madame-blavatsky/ UT]
  | alternatives = [https://universaltheosophy.com/hpb/parting-words-from-madame-blavatsky/ UT]
  | translations =  
  | translations =  
}}
}}
Line 15: Line 15:


{{Style P-Title|PARTING WORDS FROM MADAME BLAVATSKY}}
{{Style P-Title|PARTING WORDS FROM MADAME BLAVATSKY}}
<center>[''Religio-Philosophical Journal''. Chicago, Vol. XXIV, July 6. 1878, p. 2]</center>
{{Vertical space|}}
{{Vertical space|}}


DEAR SIR,—
{{Style S-Small capitals|Dear Sir}},—


So far, as I can at present foresee, this will be the last time I shall ask you to print anything over my—to many Spiritualists—loathed signature, as I intend to start for India very soon. But I have once more to correct inaccurate statements. If I had had my choice, I would have preferred almost any other person than my very esteemed friend, Dr. Bloede, to have last words with. Once an antagonist—a bitter and unjust one to me, as he himself admits—he has since made all the amends I could have asked of a scholar and a gentleman, and now, as all who read your valuable paper see, he does me the honor to call me friend. Honest in intent he always is, I am sure, but still a little prejudiced. Who of us but is [not] so, more or less? Duty, therefore, compels me to correct the erroneous impression which his letter on “Secret Societies” (Journal of June 15th) is calculated to give about the Theosophical Society. How many “Fellows” we have, how the society is flourishing, what are its operations or how conducted, no one knows or can know, save the presidents of its various branches and their secretaries. Therefore, Dr. G. Bloede, in saying that it has “failed in America, and will fail in Europe,” speaks of that of which neither he nor any other outsider has knowledge. If the Society’s only object were the study of the phenomena called Spiritual, his strictures would be perfectly warranted; for it is not secrecy but privacy and exclusiveness that are demanded in the management of circles and mediums. It would have been absurd to make [a] secret society expressly for that purpose. At its beginning the Theosophical Society was started for that sole study, and therefore, was, as you all know, open to any respectable person, who wished to join it. We discussed “Spiritual” topics freely, and were willing to impart to the public the results of all our experiments, and what {{Page aside|394}} ever some of us might have learned of the subject in the course of long studies. How our views and philosophy were received—no need to recall the old story again. The storm has hardly subsided; and the total of billingsgate poured upon our devoted heads is preserved in three gigantic scrapbooks whose contents I mean to immortalize some day. When, through the writing and noble efforts of the Journal and other spiritual papers, the secret of these varied and vexing phenomena indiscriminately called spiritual will be snatched at last, when the faithful of the Orthodox church of Spiritualism will be forced to give up—partially at least —their many bigoted and preconceived notions, then the time will have come again for Theosophists to claim a hearing. Till then, its members retire from the arena of discussion and devote their whole leisure to the fulfillment of other and more important objects of the Society.
So far, as I can at present foresee, this will be the last time I shall ask you to print anything over my—to many Spiritualists—loathed signature, as I intend to start for India very soon. But I have once more to correct inaccurate statements. If I had had my choice, I would have preferred almost any other person than my very esteemed friend, Dr. Bloede, to have last words with. Once an antagonist—a bitter and unjust one to me, as he himself admits—he has since made all the amends I could have asked of a scholar and a gentleman, and now, as all who read your valuable paper see, he does me the honor to call me friend. Honest in intent he always is, I am sure, but still a little prejudiced. Who of us but is [not] so, more or less? Duty, therefore, compels me to correct the erroneous impression which his letter on “Secret Societies” (''Journal'' of June 15th) is calculated to give about the Theosophical Society. How many “Fellows” we have, how the society is flourishing, what are its operations or how conducted, no one knows or can know, save the presidents of its various branches and their secretaries. Therefore, Dr. G. Bloede, in saying that it has “failed in America, and will fail in Europe,” speaks of that of which neither he nor any other outsider has knowledge. If the Society’s only object were the study of the phenomena called Spiritual, his strictures would be perfectly warranted; for it is not ''secrecy'' but privacy and exclusiveness that are demanded in the management of circles and mediums. It would have been absurd to make [a] secret society expressly for that purpose. At its beginning the Theosophical Society was started for that sole study, and therefore, was, as you all know, open to any respectable person, who wished to join it. We discussed “Spiritual” topics freely, and were willing to impart to the public the results of all our experiments, and what {{Page aside|394}} ever some of us might have learned of the subject in the course of long studies. How our views and philosophy were received—no need to recall the old story again. The storm has hardly subsided; and the total of billingsgate poured upon our devoted heads is preserved in three gigantic scrapbooks whose contents I mean to immortalize some day. When, through the writing and noble efforts of the ''Journal'' and other spiritual papers, the secret of these varied and vexing phenomena indiscriminately called spiritual will be snatched at last, when the faithful of the Orthodox church of Spiritualism will be forced to give up—partially at least —their many bigoted and preconceived notions, then the time will have come again for Theosophists to claim a hearing. Till then, its members retire from the arena of discussion and devote their whole leisure to the fulfillment of other and more important objects of the Society.


You perceive, then, that it is only when experience showed the necessity for its work to be enlarged, and its objects became various, that the T.S. thought fit to protect itself by secrecy. Since then, none but perjured witnesses, and we know of none, can have told about what we were doing, except as permitted by official sanction and announced from time to time. One of such objects of our society, we are willing to publicly announce.
You perceive, then, that it is only when experience showed the necessity for its work to be enlarged, and its objects became various, that the T.S. thought fit to protect itself by secrecy. Since then, none but perjured witnesses, and we know of none, can have told about what we were doing, except as permitted by official sanction and announced from time to time. One of such objects of our society, we are willing to publicly announce.
Line 26: Line 28:


So, Sir, to sum up in a word, Dr. Bloede has made a great mistake in supposing the Theosophical Society a “failure” in this or any other country. When the society counted three years ago its members by the dozens, it now counts them by the hundreds and thousands. And so far from its threatening in any respect the stability of society or the advancement of spiritual knowledge, the Theosophical Institution which now bears the name of the “Theosophical Society of the Ârya Samâj of India,” being regularly chartered by and affiliated with that great body in the land of the Âryas, will be found some day, by the Spiritualists, and all others who claim the right of thinking for themselves, to have been the true friend of intellectual and spiritual liberty—if not in America, at least in France and other countries, where an infernal priesthood thrusts innocent Spiritualists into prison by the help of a subservient judiciary and the use of perjured testimony. Its name will be respected as a pioneer of free thought and an uncompromising enemy of priestly and monkish fraud and despotism.
So, Sir, to sum up in a word, Dr. Bloede has made a great mistake in supposing the Theosophical Society a “failure” in this or any other country. When the society counted three years ago its members by the dozens, it now counts them by the hundreds and thousands. And so far from its threatening in any respect the stability of society or the advancement of spiritual knowledge, the Theosophical Institution which now bears the name of the “Theosophical Society of the Ârya Samâj of India,” being regularly chartered by and affiliated with that great body in the land of the Âryas, will be found some day, by the Spiritualists, and all others who claim the right of thinking for themselves, to have been the true friend of intellectual and spiritual liberty—if not in America, at least in France and other countries, where an infernal priesthood thrusts innocent Spiritualists into prison by the help of a subservient judiciary and the use of perjured testimony. Its name will be respected as a pioneer of free thought and an uncompromising enemy of priestly and monkish fraud and despotism.
{{Style P-Signature|H. P. BLAVATSKY.}}
{{Style P-Signature in capitals|H. P. Blavatsky.}}
{{Style P-No indent|New York, June 17th, 1878.}}
{{Style P-No indent|''New York, June'' 17''th'', 1878.}}
Retrieved from "https://en.teopedia.org/lib/Special:MobileDiff/29245"