The Star of Azazel - Azazelin Tähti

Letter No. 39 is from Morya to Sinnett.

The background of the letter is that both Olcott and H.P.B. have been criticized on The Statesman newspaper, especially for their financial status. Sinnett wrote an article to defend his friends in The Pioneer, and eventually The Statesman apologized for the original critically written article.

There is one interesting glimpse of Mahatma code in the very beginning of the letter.

My "Arhat" vows are pronounced, and I can neither seek revenge nor help others to obtain it.

Arhat refers to state and high initiates, which have already passed the need of compulsory rebirth. Later in theosophical writings it has been used to mark adepts who have attained the fourth initiation. In any case, it seems that at certain point, for reasons that are not mentioned in the letter, one is required to abstain from meddling with personal disputes when the person is seeking for revenge. I'd assume this must be part of a broader code to not fiddle too much with more mundane personal goals of the people - and could be thought also that such a person has already attained so remarkable powers that using those powers could have potentially very strong unwanted "butterfly effect" like consequences since the intention is not pure.

However, Morya is eager to help Sinnett to defend H.P.B. and in the letter Morya advises Sinnett to take measures, even legal ones to clear Olcott's and H.P.B's reputation. Morya actually even promises Sinnett to be successful if he follows Morya's advised course of action. Apparently Sinnett was able to get apology from The Statesman, so Morya kept his promise.

The letter also mentions H.P.B.'s maternal aunt, Nadyejda de Fadeyev, which Morya tells that he has visited three times.

The next letter, number 40, is from Morya to Sinnett. (Koot Hoomi has still two months left of his absence, it is told.) It has been received in Allahabad, about February, 1882. The letter is not very long, but deals with various subjects. As usual in the Mahatma letters, the practical side of current things has been used to give some related occult teaching.

M wrote:"Can you do anything to help on the Society?" Want me to speak frankly? Well I say No: neither yourself nor the Lord Sang-gias Himself — so long as the equivocal position of the Founders is not perfectly and undeniably proved due to fiendish malice and a systematic intrigue — could help it on. That's the situation as I found it, as ordered by the chiefs.

First, the problem about slandering of Blavatsky was seen as of utmost importance by the "Secret Chiefs", even though the society and its different officers often thought that the importance of individuals is not so meaningful. The time has proven the first opinion quite true, however: even today, after 135 years, the most common feedback to all things relating to theosophy is scepticism based on Blavatsky's ruined reputation.

M wrote:official proof is shortly expected from the Prince D. which will settle the vexed question as to her identity for ever at rest.

This is most likely Prince Dondukoff-Korsakoff, a Russian prince who was a correspondent and a family member of Blavatsky's. Their correspondence is very entertaining to read, since it shows the Old Lady at her most capriciously humorous and free-talking. To the point that I think that some readers have missed the winkingly ironical tone of many of these Slavonic and intelligent letters.

The latter part of the letter deals with two misguided visionaries, a Hindu reformator and a clairvoyant mystic. About the reformator, whose society Sinnett is encouraged to join for a while, is interestingly said that:

M wrote:Many of us have regretted his self-delusion but he was too good to be forcibly interfered with.

So, the intense and pure (although wrong) ideas that this religious figure had would have been possible to correct should he have been less solid ethically. How did this build an obstacle precisely? Was his own atmosphere so strongly built upon his own morals that no outside inspiration from the adepts could penetrate it vigorously enough? Or had he built so strong a karma for his own religious system that it interfered with the possibilities given by the central lodge for its would-be adepts? It might be either, both, or neither. But the word "good" here, in use where the talk is of obstacles, is intriguing for a Satanist. Yet in several cases in the (Buddhist-) Theosophical doctrine it is taught that even a "good" karma can become a hindrance; the way out of the world would be to collect no bindings at all, be they of lead or gold, so this is not a new idea.

But the most interesting part is of the other occultist, Suby Ram. I will underline few of the most important points:

M wrote:The voice of a pure, unselfish, earnest soul, absorbed in misguided, misdirected mysticism. Add to it a chronic disorder in that portion of the brain which responds to clear vision and the secret is soon told: that disorder was developed by forced visions; by hatha yog and prolonged asceticism. S. Ram is the chief medium and at same time the principal magnetic factor, who spreads his disease by infection — unconsciously to himself; who innoculates with his vision all the other disciples. There is one general law of vision (physical and mental or spiritual) but there is a qualifying special law proving that all vision must be determined by the quality or grade of man's spirit and soul, and also by the ability to translate divers qualities of waves of astral light into consciousness. There is but one general law of life, but innumerable laws qualify and determine the myriads of forms perceived and of sounds heard. There are those who are willingly and others who are unwillingly — blind. Mediums belong to the former, sensitives to the latter. Unless regularly initiated and trained — concerning the spiritual insight of things and the supposed revelations made unto man in all ages from Socrates down to Swedenborg and "Fern" — no self-tutored seer or clairaudient ever saw or heard quite correctly.

We can deduce several teachings:

a) By wrong asceticism and physically focused yoga [=occult practices] we are able to, without ever realizing it, confusing the part of the brain which sees and interprets astral visions.

b) Such an astral confusion is a magnetic (etheric) disease, which can then spread from person to person by contact, without anyone actually understanding what is happening.

c) Visions must be tested against the overall quality of the seer's spirit and soul, plus his ability to translate those visions.

d) It is not possible to be absolutely free from astral misinterpretation unless exact adeptual help has been gained in the precise training process of the seer.

Nefastos wrote:We can deduce several teachings:

a) By wrong asceticism and physically focused yoga [=occult practices] we are able to, without ever realizing it, confusing the part of the brain which sees and interprets astral visions.

b) Such an astral confusion is a magnetic (etheric) disease, which can then spread from person to person by contact, without anyone actually understanding what is happening.

c) Visions must be tested against the overall quality of the seer's spirit and soul, plus his ability to translate those visions.

d) It is not possible to be absolutely free from astral misinterpretation unless exact adeptual help has been gained in the precise training process of the seer.

Since lately I have been starting to work more (or again) with inner images through meditation, which at least on my mind or what I have understood is what astral world broadly refers to. As a side note, I often find the related terminology confusing - and I also find especially confusing the debate what is what, and what should be called astral etc. according to one or the other tradition. This almost leading me to just not care too much. Writing that here just in case somebody is confused as I am with the terminology to describe and make somehow clear to other readers that I basically meditate the appearing inner images or dream-like landscape without being actually asleep.

Nevertheless, thank you fra Nefastos for summarizing the points so precisely. Clearly the sort of "fatherly" or authoritative ethos of Morya can be heard through the letter. On personal level, I guess I am always fairly careful, but this is a subject where I feel that I would often need some guidance, and I can clearly see why point d.) is stated so bluntly. Perhaps the point b.) is what is so demanding, and perhaps why I previously stopped already years ago, then started again for some time and then stopped almost altogether again. So, of course one can have certain ritualistic and hygienic rules and practices, basically setting limits to things. However, I suspect there is no one who can say that the inner things they are working with won't have any affect to the outside world in the sense that the work will outburst or flow occasionally to ones actions or behaviour.

As an example, just something out of my head, let's say one is working with a difficult topic in mediation and then suddenly the emotions related to the topic burst to one's consciousness during coffee break and the person suddenly says something maybe a bit out of the context.

However, certain realizations related to point c.) at least have helped me so far. I mean words are just words and emotions are just emotions but it is - after all - one's actions, so the kind of actualized ethical behavior that really is the test bed of things what I at least ultimately deem ethical. At least, when put shortly.

Also another side note, through fra Obnoxion's recommendation I've been reading Walkers between the Worlds and that has been quite useful opus this far. Apologies if my comments to other's posts have been mostly just personal reflection, and even a bit vague one, but I don't just see myself experienced enough to really generalize things - at least too far or to very precise points. So, in other words, just trying to grasp on things that I have at least some experience of whenever I think I do. Maybe this is why especially in the beginning of this reading group I mostly felt just overwhelmed.

Yinlong wrote:Since lately I have been starting to work more (or again) with inner images through meditation, which at least on my mind or what I have understood is what astral world broadly refers to. As a side note, I often find the related terminology confusing - and I also find especially confusing the debate what is what, and what should be called astral etc. according to one or the other tradition. This almost leading me to just not care too much.

"Astral" is most probably THE term for many different interpretations & associations. In a way that also is a part of astral's nature, and thus a good thing to note. Different parties see astral working differently, and may either use this and/or other words, or use the word "astral" in many meanings. Overall, it is good to just read "psychic phenomena" whenever astral is mentioned, and understand that with "psychic" is meant something not spiritual, but parapsychological (possibilities of pathological not excluded). The word spiritual has a connotation of ethical, pure and lofty, while "astral" is "spiritual" things without those connotations. Something being perceived "astrally" does not mean that the thing perceived is true, and this is one of the clashing points of theosophical ethics of absolute trutfulness and many other schools of occultism (e.g. New Age "everything goes" mentality) which do not seek Truth as their priority, but magick abilities instead. The latter means that the whole Work is based upon sand, not rock, which is also why our philosophy behind SoA is essentially theosophical, even though it often uses very different methods & mindsets.

Yinlong wrote:Writing that here just in case somebody is confused as I am with the terminology to describe and make somehow clear to other readers that I basically meditate the appearing inner images or dream-like landscape without being actually asleep.

Yes, this is a good example of neutral astral working. It is not "good" (spiritual) or "bad" (egotistical, forced or fanatical) by itself, but a psychic tool which brings either good or bad results depending how, when and by whom it is handled.

In his letter, Morya mentioned that the problem was of the "forced visions": the very point of "yoga" had been to bring about this kind of results. So, once again, we see that it is the intention that counts. Seeing astral landscapes can be very invigorating, helpful, restorative, uplifting & inspiring, but if we seek especially to see beautiful landscapes, we are basically occult tv-viewers, and thus will be also exposed to the influences of the astral "advertises" - those being even more subtle & manipulative than the ones in and between our tv programs.

Yinlong wrote:Apologies if my comments to other's posts have been mostly just personal reflection, and even a bit vague one, but I don't just see myself experienced enough to really generalize things - at least too far or to very precise points. So, in other words, just trying to grasp on things that I have at least some experience of whenever I think I do. Maybe this is why especially in the beginning of this reading group I mostly felt just overwhelmed.

There's absolutely no need for apologies whatsoever; thank you for contributing, brother!

Letter no. 41. Approx. February 1882.

A short letter, but holding in itself some interesting thoughts concerning occultism & karma.

M wrote:she suffers acutely and I am unable to help her for all this is effect from causes which cannot be undone — occultism in theosophy. She has now to either conquer or die.

Reasons behind Blavatsky's suffering (at least partly the psychical effect of the judgment & ridicule of people) are derived from teaching the occult doctrines in theosophy. This effect from bringing occult facts to public consciousness seems to always rise up extreme counter reaction from Zeitgeist, the ruling archon, the public common opinion, which in its turn creates extreme pressure to the one revealing such things to wider audience. This is also part of the tests for initiation: the growing tension forces out the most primal (also elemental & energetical) answers from the initiatee, who because of that either "conquers or dies". As we know from history, sooner or later the latter has become the fate of many a publishing esotericist. For our Western era it must be said that seldom anymore are the prophets actually killed by physical force, but nevertheless the tension can be murdering all by its own – a fact which Blavatsky more than once pointed out.

M wrote:When the hour comes she will be taken back to Tibet. Do not blame the poor woman, blame me. She is but a "shell" at times and I, often careless in watching her.

As it was mentioned before in letter 26, part of the principles of the central lodge "chela" (occult student) have had to be "left behind" and in a way such a person is a mental cripple, even though ingenious one. Because of such partly mediumistic arrangements, the messenger - at least this was the case with Blavatsky – can be not wholly present in himself. "Taken back to Tibet" means, physically, naturally death. For an occultist, this is not an euphemism or allegory, but we are speaking of the actual events. Outer physical vehicle is the most cumbersome and most "other" part of one's identity, even though it certainly forms an integral part of everybody's constitution as long as the physical life lasts.

M wrote:you are working off by helping her your own law of retribution [...] due to K.H.'s friendship for you, for his using her as the means of communication.

This helps us to understand how our "karma" (i.e. "law of retribution") is always entwined with the karmas of the other people; and why it was taught in the Sermon on the Mount that we should
"forgive our debtors in order to be forgiven" (Matthew 6:12). The masters used their pupil Blavatsky as an intermediator to make possible the energetical & physical link to her student A.P. Sinnett, and because of such need of extra energy, Sinnett was given a bit more than it would be normally allowed, while more was asked from Blavatsky. Things like this – the secret sacrifices of the other people, most of all occultists – very often escape our attention.

M wrote:she suffers acutely and I am unable to help her for all this is effect from causes which cannot be undone — occultism in theosophy. She has now to either conquer or die.

Nefastos wrote:Reasons behind Blavatsky's suffering (at least partly the psychical effect of the judgment & ridicule of people) are derived from teaching the occult doctrines in theosophy. This effect from bringing occult facts to public consciousness seems to always rise up extreme counter reaction from Zeitgeist, the ruling archon, the public common opinion, which in its turn creates extreme pressure to the one revealing such things to wider audience. This is also part of the tests for initiation: the growing tension forces out the most primal (also elemental & energetical) answers from the initiatee, who because of that either "conquers or dies". As we know from history, sooner or later the latter has become the fate of many a publishing esotericist. For our Western era it must be said that seldom anymore are the prophets actually killed by physical force, but nevertheless the tension can be murdering all by its own – a fact which Blavatsky more than once pointed out.

Could this be - or are you also implying - that this was the cases in (Christian, canonized) story of Jesus? Could this be tied also to the certain esoteric (or just non-orthodox) discussion of Jesus not possibly dying. Of course the whole crucifixion and related events being one big mystery, which is there for a purpose. However, what I mean that if you at least are able to grasp the esoteric side of the related symbolism, teaching and mystery, there are many who go for great lengths to find evidence that Jesus at least didn't die (physically, at least not in normal sense) in the process. Of course there are also people, who after "finding Jesus", just go shouting around "Jesus lives", but I'm not talking about that - at least not too much. Well, why this is of interest to me is because I have recently found the past discussions between more "gnosticizing" Christians and then Iraneus et co. debating a lot about (the need for) martyrdom. So, while and after reading about the debate (gnosticizing groups being generally more against martyrdom, saying it was unnecessary waste of lives) - I am thinking how many lives then should be sacrificed for one lesson or one teaching. Also, I'm thinking this martyrdom from more "occult" point of view, which is touched on this letter. Meaning, is one able to the create then something that at least physically seems to die (enough), which would then satisfy the ones with the stakes and torches(?) - - and then I get back to the question, how did Jesus die if he did. But I guess you and the others in this group can at least recognize the topic in general I am trying to approach. Perhaps the resolution - I mean how one decides to die - is why gnosticizing groups are against very physical martyrdom? At least this wasn't brought up in the sources (Kalvesmaki, some other academic summaries about gnostic groups and early Christianity etc.) I have read about the topic. So, could also (early Christian) martyrdom (meaning just physically sacrificing oneself for the sake of faith) be understood as misunderstanding?

Short edited additional comment: Underlying my commentary, I am currently inclined to think that the declaration of all (or almost all) martyrs as saints etc. by Catholic church is just utter rubbish. By default I don't like the declaration of people into saints and the caused complexities (for example, in the recent case of Giordano Bruno cannot then be declared as a saint, because the person who sentenced him to death, is already declared as saint etc.) - and I'm fairly convinced that there are (think suicide bombers) and have been unnecessary martyrdom. But, I'm also perhaps reflecting fears, what kind of sacrifices might lie ahead of me. (No, I'm not thinking sacrificing myself anyhow - in case somebody thinks that) So, just speaking more generally, since recently the topics related to renewing oneself and going through crises etc. has been discussed here.

Yinlong wrote:Could this be - or are you also implying - that this was the cases in (Christian, canonized) story of Jesus?

Yes, for example. The difference between two paradigms, exoteric & esoteric, is energetically (often also sociologically) so vast that the tension proves to be too strong. This is part of the scapegoat effect in which the hidden tension of the masses must be carried off by an outsider. But that is actually the shadow side of the actual help given, and not its integral part. In a better, more enlightened world there would have been no crucifixion of Jesus, burning of Bruno, psychic torment of Blavatsky, & cetera, even though the teaching & energetical help would have been given.

Yinlong wrote:Perhaps the resolution - I mean how one decides to die - is why gnosticizing groups are against very physical martyrdom? [...] So, could also (early Christian) martyrdom (meaning just physically sacrificing oneself for the sake of faith) be understood as misunderstanding?

It is, because those Christians failed to understand that the martyrdom is a regrettable side effect rather than sought result. Martyrdom is "sacred" only if it unavoidable result of doing one's very best; and even in that case it becomes black magic because the result is mixed with violence. Let us think, for example, the result of some saint's martyrdom to those who murdered him: are they blessed? Some say that even that can happen, and happened to e.g. Longinus, the impaler of Jesus. As a rule, though, the murderer's karma is not pretty. And what about those people who could have been given more teaching, should the saint or prophet lived? They are left without it. And so on; martyrdom is evil, not good; but even from evil, some good can come. With right will, nature finds ways to create good things even from spilled blood – but that should not be taken as a recommendation for blood-spilling.

Nefastos wrote:But that is actually the shadow side of the actual help given, and not its integral part.

Yes, this was the side - or point of view - I referred as "occult".

Nefastos wrote: Martyrdom is "sacred" only if it unavoidable result of doing one's very best; and even in that case it becomes black magic because the result is mixed with violence.

Yes, it is this violence part - now more clarified to me since you put the word there - that most probably is what I recognize as an underlying blind spot - and what kind of makes me take very similar standpoint about martyrdom and personal sacrifices in general.

Nefastos wrote: Martyrdom is "sacred" only if it unavoidable result of doing one's very best; and even in that case it becomes black magic because the result is mixed with violence.

If martyrdom is avoidable and one still pursues that path, the potential "sacred" disappears with the violence and especially because of the selfish motivations clearly behind it. Clear to some at least, Martyrs ofcourse can trick themselves. Also willfully expecting to receive violence is taking part of it, but the purity of motivations/intention seems to have the heftiest factor in this.

Concidering the letters, No. 41 was interesting in the sense that it came closer to the notion that the Masters behind the letters might have been physical only in the sense that Blavatskys body was physical. The topic has been discussed before in this reading group, but the book itself hasn't given me clearer either or answers until now.



Onwards to the Letter 42.

Mahatma Letters editor wrote:[This letter is unsigned but is in M.'s handwriting. — Ed.]

This is interesting if one thinks the Masters working through Blavatsky. The vessel is affected in such a thorough way that the muscle memory is bypassed or altered. Nervous system, persona and feelings, everything that is the lower self compliant under the aspects of the higher self.

Mahatma Letters wrote:...no regular instruction, no regular communication is possible between us before our mutual path is cleared of its many impediments.

Continuing on my previous interpretation, the regular communication would happen through the Chelas higher self. Working towards clearing the communication between ones higher self to be able communicate in ”regular” way with the Masters. This rises a question of communication possibilities with humans at their different stages in the path of ascension. Specificly through their monads, or is it more or less one-way line, the ”lesser” being answering with ones actions. Latter seems to be the case when connecting the idea of initiations and trials/ordeals to this. Also the Monads communicating to themselves is a bit funny idea as they are one in a way.

I stopped thinking if I should have used the higher self again instead of monad, former seems to indicate towards the apex of humanity, while latter can be found as the basis of every particle, but that's a discussion we can have in another topic.

Mahatma Letters wrote:You perceived, hitherto but the light of a new day — you may, if you try, see with K.H.'s help the sun of full noon-day when it reaches its meridian. But you have to work for it, work for the shedding of light upon other minds through yours. How, will you say? Hitherto of you two, Mr. H. was positively antagonistic to our advice, you — passively resisting it at times often yielding against what you conceived your better judgment — such is my answer. The results were — what they had to be expected. No good or very little came out of a kind of spasmodic defence ——

The ideological pursuit of truth at the public forums (not meaning this one) often seems quite pointless. But the battles you've drawn to, wether you like it or not, are the chances of karmic purification one is granted. The letter at hand deal with public discussion about some phenomena and again, Spiritualists and Theosophist are some of the parties giving their perspectives on the subject. M continuing on the subject:

Mahatma Letters wrote:See what the Fragments — the most superb of articles — has done; how little effect it will produce unless the opposition is stirred up, discussion provoked and spiritualists forced to defend their foolish claims. Read editorial in Spiritualist Nov. 18, "Speculation-Spinning" — she cannot answer it as either he or you might and the result will be that the most precious hints will fail to reach the minds of those craving for truth for a solitary pearl is soon outshone in the midst of a heap of false diamonds, when there's no jeweller to point out its worth.

Mahatma Letters wrote:Let then the anticipation of a fuller introduction into our mysteries under more congenial circumstances the creation of which depends entirely upon yourself inspire you with patience to wait for, perseverance to press on to, and full preparation to receive the blissful consummation of all your desires.

Italics from original and further ephasizing the dependancy of oneself for enabling progression – clearing the way towards greater heights. I have to say that recent poetical discussions and workings inside our society have been really fruitful in this respect together with sharing ideas in lectures and elsewhere.

Thank you frater Smaragd for this week's entry - I think you got very interesting points and thoughts extracted here!

Somehow this opus works for me so, that once I feel for a fleeting moment that I'm able to grasp something, I'm again heading towards totally uncharted fields. Anyhow, I found an old thread about Unseen masters that discusses and touches a bit the same topics as touched here.

I liked frater Nefastos' way of describing the whole working with these Unseen Masters as like the tidal force (when thinking oneself multidimensionally as a planet, revolving around the Sun). However, there's so much in this to think about - about the existence of Unseen Masters on any plane, communication to this plane and back etc - that I can't say much. However, I remember expressing earlier on Finnish forum that I at least follow quite overly cautious approach with discussing or trusting on anything non-human etc. I kind of feel the same - but actually even greater danger - when thinking about Unseen Masters. Actually, the same fears were expressed quite similarly by the participants on the thread posted. Now that I found out that Yin Long is actually the name of an actual tidal wave (check my post on Finnish forums), maybe it's good to time to think about tidal things As homework, I'll at least read couple of times more through the Unseen Masters thread and fra Nefasto's blog post.

I have to agree with this:

Smaragd wrote:I have to say that recent poetical discussions and workings inside our society have been really fruitful in this respect together with sharing ideas in lectures and elsewhere.