The next letter was so short that I grapped a couple extra ones for this weeks presentation of the Mahatma Letters. Try to bear with me.
On the letter No. 4 or 143, as it's marked in the online version, we have more talk about dealing with magical phenomena. In the spirit of perseverance I'll go through them but I must warn you there is some repetition here. But as it's written: "Repetitio mater studiorum est". I'll also jump into a letter No. 205 which is linked on the online version for alternative "next letter".
Mahatma Letters wrote:
Would you wish the pillow phenomenon described in the paper?
A. P. Sinnett.
It certainly would be the best thing to do, and I personally would feel sincerely thankful to you on account of our much illused friend.
Koot Hoomi Lal Sing.
Mahatma Letters wrote:
Letter No. 205
{Olcott had, very indiscreetly, allowed to be published in an Anglo-Indian paper a letter from him describing a day at Simla and giving the names of several promenent Englishmen as having certified to the genuineness of the phenomena.}
Private.
——the situation is thrown into serious danger by recent wild indiscretions and the Khobilgan deeply incensed——
Yours ever truly,
K. H.
I was under impression the Pioneer was a paper of occult matters but it seems to have been quite casual Indian newspaper written in English. After all we've found from these letters, publishing this particular, quite neutral, phenomenon to be read by the masses were considered helpful for maybe catching the curious minds and eventually help them to turn their curiosity into more serious effort. But in the exchange between Blavatsky and K. H. another phenomena written about by Olcott (the above mentioned Cup and Saucer I presume) is considered "wild indiscretion" (Letter No. 205). This seems to base on the fact that Olcott appeals to "prominent Englishmen" certifying the phenomena which would not prove anything in the eyes of western science, on contrary agitate it to shoot such "proof" down and only cause harm to the infectious relations. After all, the Anglo-Indian newspaper must have been a collision area of these two worlds. Instead of creating such conditions of juxtaposit nature with smoke screen targets, more neutral examples should be provided. Secondly, publishing a story describing the casual nature of Blavatskys use of magic would cast dangerous ideas over casual readers of using these powers in a light hearted manner.
Letter Nr. 4 or 5 in my printed version.
Mahatma Letters wrote:Our Maha (the "Chief") has allowed me to correspond with both of you, and even — in case an Anglo-Indian Branch is formed — to come some day in personal contact with it. It now depends entirely on you. I cannot tell you more.
Here it seems as if Koot Hoomi is testing Sinnett where he might stumble down or if he can find the right way to continue his work on formation of Anglo-Indian branch of Theosophical Society. Instead of following instructions to the point, it is important as an occultist to let your own mind find the way and ask the right questions.
Mahatma Letters wrote:He is one who never questions, but obeys; who may make innumerable mistakes out of excessive zeal but never is unwilling to repair his fault even at the cost of the greatest self-humiliation —— I admit that his connection with an A. I. Branch would be "an evil" — hence, he will have no more to do with it than he has with the British, (London Branch)
Here K.H. is defending Olcott, referring to his mistakes within the letter which was discussed on the letter No. 205. Henry Steel Olcott was a military officer which in addition to above quote points to his nature of doing well in a systems of hierarchy. He is presented as an ideal right-hand path follower, an altruist who, for example, when in military serves his best to accomplishing the mission he is given and the mission the institution tries to achieve, which necessarily isn't ideal from occultists point of view. Outside or opposing forces aren't given much thought and the oversight is a magnet for trouble. K.H. doesn't look down on such vices like I would expect from a master student relationship. This suggests that it is ok to have imperfections of character, one just has to pick ones battles. From satanist point of view one can try to "fulfill" oneself as far as it is possible, but such continuous intensity has it's problems. We see K.H.'s soft attitude also towards Blavatsky earlier in this letter:
Mahatma Letters wrote:But our friend is not one to cause her mind to reflect the philosophical resignation of Marcus Aurelius. The fates never wrote that she could say: "It is a royal thing, when one is doing good to hear evil spoken of himself."
Mahatma Letters wrote:—— he said, "you who preach the highest standards of morality, of truthfulness, etc., you would have me play the part of an imposter. You ask me to change my clothes at the risk of giving a false idea of my personality and mystifying the gentleman you send me to. And what if he asks me if I personally know Koot'hoomi, am I to keep silent and allow him to think I do? This would be a tacit falsehood, and guilty of that, I would be thrown back into the awful whirl of transmigration!"
The neophyte can not accept the idea of giving false impulses outside even from his outer form nor keeping silent which might suggest towards conclusions untrue. In his state of mortification, he escapes the social and cultural conventions for higher cause which Sinnett is not expected to understand from beneath his prejudices. Though the neophyte isn't completely ignorant of these conventions but his current state demand such position towards them. So the neophyte can't approve the mission given to him with suggestions untrue to his own state. This brings me back to the subject above, of a master not being unquestioned authority but rather a gentle guide when the real authorities work within. Same goes for the Anglo-Indian Society Sinnett is working on; Koot Hoomi as a representative of the mother society, working as a master, who doesn't intervene too much but rather gives the new branch space to find it's own way as long as general rules are followed.
Mahatma Letters wrote:The field is yours and no one will be allowed to interfere with you except myself on behalf of our Chiefs
Mahatma Letters wrote:I must ask you to remember that the new Society shall not be allowed to disconnect itself with the Parent Body, though you are at liberty to manage your affairs in your own way without fearing the slightest interference from its President so long as you do not violate the general Rules.
Mahatma Letters wrote:Far be it from me to discourage one so willing as yourself by setting up impossible barriers to your progress. We never whine over the inevitable but try to make the best of the worst. And though we neither push nor draw into the mysterious domain of occult nature those who are unwilling; never shrink from expressing our opinions freely and fearlessly, yet we are ever as ready to assist those who come to us; even to — agnostics who assume the negative position of "knowing nothing but phenomena and refuse to believe in anything else." It is true that the married man cannot be an adept, yet without striving to become "a Raja Yogi" he can acquire certain powers and do as much good to mankind and often more, by remaining within the precincts of this world of his. Therefore, shall we not ask you to precipitately change fixed habits of life, before the full conviction of its necessity and advantage has possessed you.
Further on Koot Hoomi explains his soft attitude towards his "disciplines" and sceptics. Progress is made with small steps and certain knowledge is waiting for it's right time to come under attention. No sceptics nor aspirants are forcefed with teachings, but everyone will be helped when the time comes. There's also differend paths of which everyone will find their own and as we see from the world, a pushy attitude or straight out crusade type of thing will get people feeling smothered and a serious danger of going astray.
I'll leave you couple extra interesting quotes to be discussed. Important points but quite self explanatory. As if this wasn't too long already.
Mahatma Letters wrote:There is a tone of complaint in your question whether there ever will be a renewal of the vision you had, the night before the picnic day. Methinks, were you to have a vision nightly, you would soon cease to "treasure" them at all. But there is a far weightier reason why you should not have a surfeit — it would be a waste of our strength.
Mahatma Letters wrote:The term "Universal Brotherhood" is no idle phrase. Humanity in the mass has a paramount claim upon us, as I try to explain in my letter to Mr. Hume, which you had better ask the loan of. It is the only secure foundation for universal morality. If it be a dream, it is at least a noble one for mankind and it is the aspiration of the true adept.