1877 *
1977
SHAMBHALHA’S FIFTH
“CENTENNIAL EFFORT”
GIVES BIRTH TO THE
SIXTH
“Men and parties, sects and
schools are but the mere ephemera of the world’s day. Truth, high-seated
upon its rock of adamant, is alone eternal and supreme.”
“The work now submitted...
is written in all sincerity. It is meant to speak the truth... without.... mercy
for enthroned error, nor reverence for usurped authority... it calls for a
restitution of barrowed robes, and the vindication of calumniated but glorious
reputations.”
“Defence and full
vindication she must have...”
-The
Mahatma Morya
“Someday the world will come
to know me better.”
-Helena
Petrovna Blavatsky
Writing in 1877 to a future Vice-President of her Theosophical Society,
an Imperial Councillor to the Czar, to Professor Alexander N. Aksakoff—whom the
leading Encyclopaedist of Psychical Research, Dr. Nandor Fodor, has called “the
scientific Russian investigation of spiritualism”—, Madame H.P. Blavatsky
observed, “Well, my book has appeared at last. My darling was born last
Saturday, September 29...” Thus appeared in two volumes her first great
guidebook to Occultism,
With the appearance of these massive twin-volumes of profound learning
and esoteric knowledge, H.P. Blavatsky had finally achieved that rare
accomplishment: the attention of a worldwide audience permanently drawn to a
message. This was a goal that had eluded her best efforts for six previous
years, years of false-starts and crushed hopes, disappointing desertions and
thwarted undertakings: the debacle of the premature society in Cairo; the cul de
sac of the Eddy séances controversy; the scandal of the Holmes mediumship; the
fiasco of the “Miracle Club”; the embarrassing Felt episode; the Gerry Brown
publishing failure; the Baron de Palm estate hoax; the aborted book. “Skeleton
Keys to Mysterious Gates”; the personal tragedy that had come to her in the
false promise of the Betanelly business enterprises and marriage. These were,
indeed, the painful birth-pangs preliminary to the emergence of a Message
signalling a new World-Epoch of
1877 vs. 1875—THE MESSAGE, NOT THE SOCIETY, IS THE ONLY
SEED-BED OF FUTURE PROMISE
As a necessary prerequisite to securing the widest possible audience in space and time for the Message she bore from Shambhalha—the one ever-enduring, ever-hidden, ever-impregnable World-Center of Benevolent Occultism on this globe—, this attention-getting debut of September 29, 1877, marked the Birth of H.P. Blavatsky’s Esoteric Work as World-Teacher for the coming “Aquarian Age” just as surely as November 17, 1875, dating the establishment of her Theosophical Society, was the beginning of the exoteric effort to form the nucleus of a truly Universal Brotherhood on the basis of an organized public structure receptive to Universal (Occult) Truth. This latter attempt—seen by those Masters who inspired it, as having been one “forlorn” even at its birth—ran quickly to ruin, so that within 14 years (two septenary cycles), the Mahatma K.H. told H.P.B., “the Society has liberated itself from our grasp and influence and we have let it go—we make no unwilling slaves”—to which was added his bleak prophecy that “it is now a soulless corpse, a machine run so far well enough” under the Presidency of Colonel Olcott, “but which will fall to pieces when he is gone” (Letters from the Masters of Wisdom, Second Series, pp. 68-9).
No “corpse” ever gave birth, neither ought one to look to what is today organized Theosophy (every group-center of which began as a fragment—or the fragment of a fragment—broken off the original, decaying, parent body) to bring forth the life-seed of future flowering in the cycles of time which lie before us. So it also is that the many who in 1975 celebrated the Centennial of the physical birth of this Society and the Movement which followed thereon, ought better to have reserved their jubilation for September 1977 and the Centenary of the birth of the Spiritually living offspring to which its authoress was mother. For the “father” of the “darling” then delivered was naught but “Truth, high-seated upon its rock of adamant... alone eternal and supreme.” And it is only from this immortal Message she bore, as alive and spiritually fruitful today as when first she began to reveal it for future generations, that there can issue even yet the consummation of all the far-seeing compassionate hopes which animated her Mission of unstinting self-sacrifice.
THE DOOR THAT
This writer, for one, can testify firsthand to the contagious spiritual
fire, the ever-burning flame, implanted between the covers of this hallowed
book—for in his youth it touched his inmost being and converted the feeble spark
of what then were his dying aspirations into a quenchless blazing star that has
guided him across the years since that day long ago. Whatever benefit the few or
the many, now or in the future time, may gain from his work and that of The
Blavatsky Foundation he conceived and brought about, will ultimately have to be
traced back to the prosaic beginning 37 years ago and to a rebound 30-year-old
copy of the second volume of Isis Unveiled, stamped on the inside cover,
“Gift to the Fresno County Free Library.” This was his first introduction—in his
life, at any rate—to the Primordial Wisdom. It followed by just a few days his
idle perusal, as a 15-year-old lad waiting his turn for a haircut, of the
Later that same year, having read thru the volume twice or thrice with ever-mounting interest, fascination, respect and intellectual exhilaration, this writer’s curiosity was piqued by finding reference to a “Mme. H.P. Blavatsky” as one who had been, it was said, “a medium professionally in Brooklyn, New York, before the founding of the Theosophical Society” (John Mulholland, Beware Familiar Spirits, pp. 335; 91). With the guidance of librarian, this lad made his first excursion into the library’s biographical section in hopes of learning whether this suspected medium had been the wife of the “H.P. Blavatsky” who had written Isis Unveiled, the only then-available volume of this work giving no hint but that its author was certainly of the male gender! What was found was Carl Eric Bechhofer Roberts’ 1931 Blavatsky-Centennial biography, The Mysterious Madame, touted as “the first fully documented biography of her, and the first impartial survey of the Theosophical Society from its obscure beginnings to its present world-wide position.” With its parade of terrible charges and its purported facts, “fully documented,” this attack at once almost crushed the reader under the unrelieved oppression of its smashing onslaught, leaving the lad numb with shock, wounded in spirit and a brain half-paralyzed with perplexity!
THE FIRST VOW (1940): TO FIND THE TRUTH
Through it all, only one ray of hope could be seen. Taken at face-value, Roberts’ indictment of HPB was as convincing and as ostensibly invincible, standing alone, as had been that of Harry Houdini in the latter’s book aggressively “debunking” psychic phenomena in general and some of its greatest cases in particular. On first reading this book, A Magician Among the Spirits, as a beginner’s introduction to the vast literature of the subject, this writer earlier had been at once captivated by it; the “King if the Magicians” had fast become his first “hero” among the “Ghost-Hunters”; and he had made the review of Houdini’s “exposé” an extemporaneous oration before his high-school English class, “The Fraud of Spiritualism.” But soon thereafter, upon finding in this same library Researches in Spiritualism, an original source of testimony by one chief witness (Sir William Crookes, himself later a Vice-President of HPB’s Theosophical Society) whom “Harry the Hero” had especially targeted as a numbskull, this youth had quickly realized that excerpts and slanted, worked-over paraphrased portions of testimony as reported second-hand by a pleader, a partisan advocate and by a professional “debunker” foremostly, are no trustworthy substitute for the uncut, firsthand words of the original witnesses themselves! Set against Crooke’s own testimony, the “Magician Among the Spirits” was permanently deflated for this writer, and his righteous pose as an honest, truth-seeking investigative-reporter of psychic marvels was seen to be another stage-act of the famed, publicity-seeking “escape artist”—an escape from truth! (Long afterwards, Houdini’s mechanically conspired to “frame” one medium, his most famous victim, on false charges of trickery in his most sensational “investigation”!) Thus the “ray of hope” that still gleamed through the darkness Roberts had invoked: If the falsehoods, phony claims and spurious charges of Houdini could be so deceptively persuasive when taken on their own, unchecked, why might not the equally formidable representations in The Mysterious Madame was reconcilable with the philosopher-exponent who had written that profound tome, Isis Unveiled, Volume Two.
How could this tormenting quandry and conflict be resolved? There seemed but one last possibility of doing that, one final means, perchance, of satisfying the hope—arising almost as anticipation and presentiment—of discovering H.P. Blavatsky innocent of the terrible charges against her. If anyone had that truth it certainly must have been her chief accuser, Madame Coulomb, as Roberts made quite clear. And in his bibliography, this reader hopefully found this entry: “By Emma Coulomb: Some Account of my Intercourse with Madame Blavatsky.” Never will this writer forget that momentous day 37 years ago when, upon his first introduction to the controversies surrounding Mme Blavatsky, he vowed with all the determination he could muster, with the resolve of a consciously articulated will, to have “before anything on earth or in life” the knowledge of whether or not she really had been guilty of all the charges brought against her.
THE SECOND VOW (1947): TO SHARE WITH ALL THE TRUTHS FOUND
It was not until reaching the seventh year of the Septenary Cycle thus begun, that this writer obtained, and obtained first sight of, that priceless 1884 pamphlet by Emma Coulomb. In 1946 and but a few months before the appearance of Gertrude Marvin Williams’ Priestess of the Occult: Madame Blavatsky, a copy of Coulomb’s work in the first edition came into his possession. What was found therein to vindicate HPB—and what could be found nowhere else—armed him invincibly for the fast-approaching affray with Mrs. Williams whose contrived “biography”, with its deliberately malevolent tide of fabricated lies, put the Roberts production altogether in the shade, Williams’ 1946 attack being the most complete, brutal hatchet-job ever performed on the memory and public image of Shambhalha’s last Messenger. This writer’s now-rare rebuttal, The Truth About Madame Blavatsky, published ten years earlier. It left him greatly disappointed and keenly aware, as never before, of the immense need still outstanding for a comprehensive, detailed defence and definitive vindication of HPB from all the charges pending against her. While Mrs. Hastings’ analysis was penetrating and her command of the facts superlative, it was for him disturbing to learn that the “two volumes” of the Hastings work consisted only of two slim, small booklets (the promised “Volume III” on the important Adyar “shrine phenomena” controversy having never been published—and, as he later learned, having mysteriously vanished from the Hastings estate before or after her death in the early 1940’s). This was disappointing because he had expected to find two hefty volumes of the kind he now saw were demanded by the need and the opportunity which even his preliminary study of the evidence then already had shown could be powerfully prepared in detail by HPB’s defenders to cover all the ground of controversy.
Consequently, on March 1, 1947, realizing the inadequate, unfinished state of the Blavatsky Defence—indeed, the pitiful state in which her neglectful followers of sixty years and more had left it—, this writer made a second vow, a resolution coincident with the beginning of the second Septenary Cycle of what had now become his dedicated devotion to the Cause of Madame Blavatsky. Whereas the first, in 1940, had been to satisfy his own personal and private understanding, this second was to bend all his talents, resources and ambitions to the one goal of bringing before the public itself all of his past and future discoveries and findings in her defence, for her open vindication.
Pursuant to this, in May 1947, he addressed similar petitions to the
heads of all the major and some minor Theosophical and Theosophically-oriented
centers here and abroad, urging the creation of an international committee,
organized for the sole purpose of preparing competition between centers of
organized Theosophy, nevertheless, he was optimistic and naive enough to
suppose that one thing for which all “Theosophists” could cooperate, if nothing
else, was the defence of their Great Teacher. So it was he proposed that the
membership of the committee be composed of leading historians each appointed by
a center, while the research data required, together with the expenses of the
undertaking, be supported jointly by all of the cooperating centers. As
incentive for the project, samples were privately distributed of some new
important discoveries of his (discoveries not otherwise detected nor
subsequently published), demonstrating how the mechanical structure of the
incriminating portions of the so-called “Blavatsky-Coulomb correspondence” was
consistent with forgery, and showing simultaneously how one could discredit the
facade of finality given by Dr. Richard Hodgson to the purported testimony of
handwriting experts” who were alleged to have ruled against HPB at the last).
The first of these petitions was addressed to The Blavatsky Association at
1977—THE ONE-HUNDREDTH, THE THIRTIETH, THE TENTH
YEAR
This
year is not only the Centennial of Isis Unveiled—and of all that
implies—, it is also the 110th anniversary of the Battle of Mentana;
and the 90th of Madame Blavatsky’s “Gesthemane” (when, on the
threshold of death in the spring of 1887, all bur her Compassion and indomitable
Will was ready to relinquish the pain of life for the peace that beckoned from
beyond). It is the 80th anniversary of the appearance of her major
posthumously-published writings (in the Besant-Mead-edited “Volume III”, The
Secret Doctrine). It is the 70th anniversary of Colonel H.S.
Olcott’s death and of the succession to his Presidency by Mrs. Annie Besant; the
60th anniversary of Alice Leighton Cleather’s establishment of The
H.P.B. Library (the only enduring establishment by one of HPB’s exclusive “Inner
Group” of closest personal pupils), the first “Back-to-Blavatsky” center; the
50th anniversary of William Kingland’s epochal “A Critical Analysis
of the 1885 Report of the Society for Psychical Research” (published by the
Kingsland-Cleather-organized Blavatsky Association). And it is the
40th anniversary of Mrs. Hastings’ “Defence of Madame
Blavatsky.”
This
year is also the 30-and-7th of this writer’s dedication to finding
the truth—and all the truth obtainable—about H.P. Blavatsky; and the
30th anniversary of his vow and unrelenting endeavor to make public
all of what can be discovered of that truth.
To
build a sturdy bridge of enduring accomplishments across these 30 years has not
been easy. Countless have been the difficulties, often petty and personal; some
of self-limitation which have annoyed this writer’s days and nights, stolen his
time, and sometimes beclouded his judgment; occasionally others of formidable
menace have threatened to make the only sensible course seem at times to be one
of resignation and escape to more mundane “creature comforts” than this kind of
work can tolerate (their seductive voice echoed in that of one theosophical
leader who candidly advised him, not too many years ago: “Get a job, Walter, and
put your Blavatsky work on the back-burner!”). There have been the intolerable
delays, the crippling needs and unfulfilled wants arising now and again within
every aspect of the undertaking; the countless diversions of false-promise, the
incalculable hours wasted on hundreds of pages of letters, petitions and plea to
theosophists who never replied (once, at 40 the counting of them stopped!), to
prospective co-workers whose interest died away or never was manifest, to old
friends and erstwhile supporters who fell off, never to be heard from again.
Ever, the denials, the disappointments, the defeats.
Despite
all, he has come to where he is today, along the way deceived, deserted, ignored
or mocked by many, by some for whom he once held great hopes as potential
companion-warriors for the Cause; by a few he once counted as friends. But
always, he has been encouraged, uplifted and helped, his enthusiasm spurred upon
the thorny path by some few—though now, by even fewer. And foremost among
these Good Samaritans, he must count ones “not of this fold” but his by
birth-and-blood, his late lamented father and the mother who consented to serve
to her last as first President of The Blavatsky Foundation—and his brother, too.
Any one of these three could have insisted on turning him out into the street at
any time after 1955, and into the company of what the Mahatma Koot Hoomi dared
to call, “the brutal herd,” whose first question is always, “Are you making any
money out of all this reading and writing?” But they did not, being in heart—to
use a phrase from HPB—of “true Christian charity.”
Before
looking to the challenge of tomorrow, it is fitting to tally-up the results of
the past, of this closing first-decade of The Blavatsky Foundation, of this
writer’s 37 years in search of all the truth about Madame Blavatsky, of these
last 30 years of public work for the Cause of the Masters of the White Path of
Shambhalha. But before doing this, some things should be permanently
clarified. One is that without the profoundly-appreciated record of support
of every kind and in every way from family, friends and strangers, right down to
that of the “co-worker” who now reads this page--suppliers all, “ammunition
bearers” who have helped stock the arsenal to keep the guns firing up front of
the line! —, without this support (freely given when the only personal return
any benefactor could expect—at most—was a bit more information, of discovery and
learning to improve one’s understanding of the Great Teacher to whom all
mutually are grateful for the very Light of Truth in our minds and hearts),
without this help, and in no other way, could all have been done that has
been done by this writer!
No
matter how small at times the measure of help, nor how often problematical, no
matter what its sources, known and unknown, seen or unseen, let it be fully
understood that when this writer speaks of “accomplishment” or of what he
“alone” or “only” has managed to do, the reference always is to himself acting
as the sole channel, the solitary vehicle, of what is the
ultimate, intellectual end-process or expression that has resulted from, or is
the flowering of, so to say, the collective effort of many minds and
bodies besides his own one objective psycho-physical self. Quite apart from the
over-riding fact that nothing could have been done except for Karma
generated long before—whether that which bears upon this era from the actions of
others or merely “his own” (just as surely as it also is true that without the
exercise of present volition day-by-day, each tomorrow that follows
would be different than what it is)—, what one does in this life may owe
little to the one who does it but much to those other “lives” which made the
doing possible, in the planting of seed for potential interest, incentive,
talent and opportunity. And how many helping hands of families, friends and
strangers in other lands and other centuries supported “them” in the
for-us-impenetrable past of long, long ago? So, dear reader, when you read, do
not say this writer is “bragging of his own good works,” but rather that he is
paying homage, within the circumscribed mode of ever-inadequate language, to
all who have made it possible for him to do in this life these
things for the Cause of Humanity, the only Cause of the Great Masters of the
White Path.
A second
point never to be forgotten is that, as he is the first to admit—for only he
knows—, what has been done is only a small
fraction of what ought to have been done, of what this writer knew
should have been done, of what he hoped and tried to do. For his
failures are many times over again the number of his successes! But of
this, one encouraging thing may be said: of all these “failures”, few can be
counted which still cannot be erased, remedied and converted to successes for
this Cause, given time, applied energy and the necessary help in days to
come!
Finally,
a review, in fair and proper perspective, of this writer’s work for HPB and her
Cause, must take into account the continuity of this activity over the
years, together with its quantity and quality, as well as the
results and the influence it has generated in the course of her
Defence since 1946. No honest judgment can be made of these factors without at
the same time examining the work of all others—past and present—so as to afford
criteria for relative comparison. In this, no denigration of any defender of HPB
is implied. Each must do or try to do whatever he or she best can; and in the
scales of Karma, merit or demerit depends upon how much one has done as set
against what one was capable of doing. By this latter standard, this
writer may be harshly judged, indeed—and before a “judge” to whom the opinions
of the world, the reading audience, and this writer himself, mean nothing at
all! Nevertheless, let us—as they say—“look at the facts.”
BREAKING ALL RECORDS FOR H.P.B.—IN CONTINUITY, PRODUCTIVITY,
QUALITY, RESULTS AND LEADERSHIP OF DEFENCE
(1) First of all, it must be admitted that before this writer, no one in the history of the modern “Theosophical Movement” established anything like a 30-year record of sustained, productive research, writing and publication in the defence of Madame Blavatsky. To be sure, Colonel Olcott occasionally wrote and spoke in her defence from 1875 to 1906; but he never penned so much as one article specifically to that purpose and at the crucial testing-point, during the Coulomb affair early in 1885, he failed and his failure to marshal her defence helped Fanz Hartmann (whose first pamphlet was printed at his own expense, and the second, for which he served as editor—the “official” defence—, was withdrawn and suppressed by the Theosophical Society itself!), held the field during 1884-85 and only until A.P. Sinnett’s two pamphlets and biography, Incidents in the Life of Madame Blavatsky, superceded. For 41 years, until the 1927 appearance of William Kingsland’s “Critical Analysis” (Was She a Charlatan?), Sinnett’s pamphlet, The ‘Occult World’ Phenomena and the Society for Psychical Research, stood as the best-available written defence of HPB’s challenged wonders (but, early-on, when it went out of print and Sinnett himself was unable to reprint it after his own financial ruin, no one else thought to do so—least of all the Theosophical Society which, down to this day, has relied on always keeping in print Annie Besant’s 1907 defence booklet with all its “howlers”!). In 1937, ten years after Kingsland, Beatrice Hastings for exceeded her immediate predecessor with her own published booklets; but she died before completing her projected work, and after having lost interest even earlier when theosophists at-large and their organizational leadership displayed no incentive in really supporting her undertaking (and her booklets, too, are long out of print). Again, after ten years, came this writer’s dedication to that public cause, and the debut of his first printed defence of HPB.
(2) Secondly, while at the same time leading the on-going struggle to destroy the poisonous tap-root from which most subsequent attacks have sprouted, the Coulomb-missionary-Hodgson-SPR Committee combination, this writer has been consistently at the forefront of the Blavatsky Defence at each and every newly-arisen onslaught of major proportions—and many if not most lesser ones—made against HPB since 1946. The public record in corroboration of this up to 1970 may be found summarized in The Blavatsky Foundation’s “Introduction” circular and, afterwards, followed in its Newsletters and various publications. The later accomplished projects publicly countering the opposition, include: The 1970 Press Release (mailed to several hundred potentially-concerned public parties and media centers) exposing the American Federation of Astrologers’ violation of its own declared “Code of Ethics” in suppressing—so far as its governing body could—all notice of this writer’s rebuttal to the 1969 Costain attack, financed as this latter was by phony “forecasts” of a major astrology magazine (the editor of which was summarily dismissed when the publisher received our letter of rebuttal and exposure). The reply to the Ron Wright radio attack, when this writer was the first defender of HPB ever known to freely gain equal air-time for reply, under the F.C.C. “Fairness Doctrine” rule. In 1971, the first publication of solid evidence (discovered by this writer only) showing the 1946 Williams book had been a deliberate “hatchet-job” instigated (and doubtless paid for) by certain religious bigot-conspirators (identified as reactionary Jesuits of the Nesta Webster political persuasion). The simultaneous first release of the news that this writer had made astounding discovery of the first documented proof that the so-called “Memoirs” of HPB’s distinguished first-cousin, Count Witte, had been perverted by the interpolation of forgery, including spurious passages denigrating HPB, findings (still unpublished) pledges to be the most remarkable of the 1962-1973 period of the Blavatsky Defence, as regards “ancient” history. The 1972 exposure of the Daniel Cohen “biographical” sketch of HPB—printed by a major publisher and the longest opposition attack newly-published in 25 years—, a sketch thus shown to be a back-work re-hash of the 1970 paperback re-issue of the Williams book (unacknowledged by Cohen, so that, by his own standards, his research was no better than plagiarism of something off the local supermarket bookrack!). In 1974, “Madame Blavatsky and Occult Tibet,” with its exclusive exposure of the Bharati forgery, this rebuttal spearheading the White Path counter-attack on Black Tantrism. In 1975, the critique, documented in detail (never denied), exposing the parallel claims of the Dalai Lama and of Boris de Zirkoff (and his plagiarizing) in their representing falsely that the Panchen Lamas of Tashilhunpo were no more than creatures of a 17th century edict from Lhassa, a claim which, if believed, would make HPB and her “Brotherhood in Tibet” no better than imbeciles on the subject of Tibetan Buddhist history! (And, for those who have seen the privately-circulated “Preliminary Notes” of 1976 exposing one particular school of Pseudo-Theosophy, it would have to here be tallied as both a new departure for this writer’s work and as a distinct landmark in defence of the perpetuation of HPB’s unadulterated Teachings—a harbinger of “things to come,” for the sword that is wielded in her defence against the open, avowed foe, can as easily be turned against the covert adversary masquerading as “mouthpiece of the Masters”!)
(3) Thirdly, as will be shown in our upcoming expanded treatment of this subject, this writer has prepared in HPB’s direct defence and has had published (and almost half of these published not by himself nor by this foundation)—whether book, pamphlet, article, circular, press release, corrective information-advertisement, book review, or letter-to-the-editor—a greater number of such items than anyone else in history.
(4) Fourthly, a tentative count and comparison of wordage-total of such items indicates that the total so created by this writer and thus printed exceeds that similarly done by any other defender of Madame Blavatsky, living or dead.
(5) Fifthly, this writer would be willing to bet that what he has written and which, for want of means, still remains unpublished for the defence of HPB (including some 300 single-spaced typewritten pages of analysis proving Richard Hodgson cleverly faked the “expert opinion” on the handwriting questions in HPB’s case—a small portion of this analysis now being on open file with the Hon. Secretary of the S.P.R. in London), altogether constitutes a greater total of unprinted mss. Of the kind than exists elsewhere in this world today.
(6) Sixthly, that in respect to the most important of criteria, viz., the results accomplished through work done in Mme Blavatsky’s Defence, the sum total of results brought about by this one writer’s individual, persistent, 30-year endeavor far outstrips the accumulated effects created by any pervious defender (not excluding the team of paid attorneys who in 1890-1891 prosecuted her suit for libel against Elliott Coues and The New York Sun).
Thus, in illustration of many exclusive results which can be shown, this writer in defending HPB, has been the first and only one since 1885 to successfully get his criticisms (or some of the more important of them) of Richard Hodgson and the 1884-85 Committee of the British S.P.R. who condemned her, published in the pages of that very Society itself; and, to see his book in her defence reviewed in that Society’s Journal—the first and only such book so reviewed. Moreover, this writer was the first to obtain (and from the S.P.R. itself, in 1955) documented proof that Dr. Hodgson deliberately and knowingly lied in bringing false charges against HPB, falsehoods of his which frightened the Council of the Theosophical Society into withdrawing its official defence of her (another exclusive discover of this writer still awaiting publication!). Similarly, it was at this writer’s personal initiative and petition, formally submitted as a Member of the British S.P.R. (and renewed after five years of stalling and obstruction), that this same London Society fortuitously discovered what was its “non-existent” secret case-file on the 1884-1885 investigation of HPB’s phenomena (until then the last source of original evidence on the case untapped in this century); and, at his request and direction, this file was ordered, indexed and microfilmed at his personal expense (though before he received the master film, a copy was made without his knowledge or permission and obtained by an official of the British Theosophical Society—whom this writer had previously and privately apprised of this project—, and third-generation copies were distributed to numerous theosophists, howbeit no copy was offered to this writer even though The American Theosophist had just completed publication of this landmark critique, “The Hodgson Report—18885-1960”!) Needless to say, the “pirated” copies were passed out like cookies, at a cost of about one-twentieth of the original; and, although no theosophical official involved, at Wheaton or London, ever attempted to rectify the imbroglio nor to give any credit of the Society’s International President, the late N. Sri Ram, and the S.P.R. officials—who even offered to reimburse the writer’s costs—, that they were more than fair!).
(7) This kind of listing could go on and on—unprecedented, unequalled, unapproached in its range, scope and results. But it is enough to close it here by saying that of those twenty-five discoveries which he considers his greatest found for Madame Blavatsky’s Defence, facts not otherwise recognized (and only five of which relate centrally to the Coulomb-Hodgson-SPR Committee controversies, for the defence against which he is best known)—and only six of which have been published at any time—, not one is paralleled in importance by another find published by any other historian or defender-researcher within the last 40 years. Furthermore, it can be said that of the ten most important of these 25, only two (20 percent) having been in print before now, not one is equally by any discovery made by any other researcher in the 102-year history of her Defence.
* * *
Thus, whether in quality of content and of results gained therefrom, or by number of years or continuity of sustained leadership exhibited in vigilant response and definitive rebuttal to successive enemy attacks, major and sundry, or even in quantity by tally of the number of defence works written and published (as well as prepared and unpublished) and the total word-content of them all—, however all is evaluated, the solid, inescapable block of extraordinary accomplishment this writer has brought to the defence of Shambhalha’s last Messenger and her Adept-Brothers, is, in the annals of the movement she initiated, absolutely UNIQUE, altogether unprecedented and unrivalled, no matter how it may be objectively considered!
AFTER ’47-TO-’74, A “SIGNAL FROM SHAMBHALHA”
In view of this incontestable record—standing alone and untouched in its exemplary measure and range of public answering the greatest of this century’s needs which might be met by a solitary individual—, a record which, indeed, adds up to making this writer the most vigilant, prolific, effective and successful leader whom time has yet brought forth from the “brutal herd” to the defence of Madame Blavatsky, Shambhalha’s greatest Messenger of the last 2,000 years, none of what here follows ought to excite any great surprise nor come as anything incongruous, if we remember that it was the Master K.H. who, speaking for the Sons of Shambhalha in his first letter of the celebrated Mahatma correspondence, declared, “Ingratitude is not one of our vices.”
So it was that, first of all, in October 1974, the Secretary-Organizer of The Blavatsky Foundation, at long last, unexpectedly and consciously received what can best be called a “Signal from Shambhalha.” This will be recounted in full detail, together with the proofs of its “veridicality” (as the Parapsychologists would say), in our next publication. This was totally unlike anything he has before or since consciously experienced, utterly unlike anything he ever anticipated, hoped-for, imagined, or read about and herd of at anytime. And the first import of this “Signal” is that, as the 1975-2000 Cycle unfolds, the Heart-Center of all Real Occultism on this globe is still alive and active with Compassion for “the Great Orphan,” Humanity; that the “Guardian Wall” still stands against evil and against the “senders of evil”; and that the Chief and Greatest of the Guardians is now as ever supremely watchful, keenly vigilant in the protection of His Blessed Dharma and of those who would join unselfishly, courageously, sacrificially in Its public protection. In short, the protection, the defence—exemplified in this writer’s works—of Primordial Buddhism, the Ancient Living Wisdom, of its Messengers, and of its public perpetuation, pure and unadulterated (as epitomized in the Teachings of H.P. Blavatsky and her Arhat-Brothers), together with the historical vindication of these Messengers and Teachers (the first and greatest in this Dark Age, the Kali Yuga, being Siddhartha Sakyamuni, and the last being HPB herself), is what is of concern to Shambhalha and what is alone worthy of drawing the attention to help of that Bastion of Spiritual Benedicience during this present Occult Epoch! Nothing else and nothing less can be counted.
The second important of this “Signal” was that if came as no “reward” to a “privileged recipient”, but simply as a direct, far-seeing, prophetic, protective intervention at a time of impending danger, otherwise unsuspected; and it thus implied concern and interest on the highest level—not for what this writer already had done in the past, but for what he was seen to be capable of doing for Shambhalha’s Great Cause in the future. Thus, it was also a sign and a symbol of encouragement and incentive—not alone for the recipient, but for all those to whom this Cause is dearest, and who might recognize the “Signal” for what it was. Verification of this—at least for this writer himself—may be seen in that part of what then was “future” and now is “past”: his 1975 three-part Centenary call to all Blavatsky-believers to take up the duty which has fallen to them in the absence of the expected “Messenger” (and in showing how this duty demands the defence of the last Messenger, by sweeping away the tide of delusion and falsehood obscuring her Teaching and her right to teach and to be believed!): in his revealing 1976 treatise on the Brotherhood of Luxor (standing as it does at the crux of the issue of the reality of the Mahatma Brotherhood ands its “Centennial Efforts” in the Western World); and, especially this writer’s subsequent findings in support of HPB’s knowledge of Tibet and Tantra (made during 1975-76, alluded to in our December 1976 Report); and, finally and foremost, in 1977, his two most notable discoveries of the last 28 years of service for HPB, one of these being the denouement of this monograph.
Need this be so strange? Where, pray tell, is there anyone, with moral sense above that of a cretin, who, while believing that the Mahatmas and the Brotherhood of Mahatmas and the Chief of that Brotherhood exist as pictured by Madame Blavatsky—and were not out-creations of a fevered fancy of her own—, would also believe that Shambhalha takes no more interest in the Defence of its last Messenger than does the collective leadership of organized Theosophy, or has no more concern than does the latter today in helping and using to the fullest (and for Shambhalha’s own spiritual designs) the untapped, unexhausted public potential of the principal present source of that Defence, the still-unpublished, yet to be exploited, discoveries and work, past and present and future, of this writer?
THE “NEW IMPULSE”—WITHOUT “THE MESSENGER”!
Why, it will be asked, should anyone for an instant entertain any notion whatsoever that at this time the might Chohans of the Brotherhood of Mahatmas would have anything more than idle, passing, non-active interest in Walter A. Carrithers, Jr., or in what he has done, is doing, or can and will do? Is it not true, it will be objected, that we are now in “the last quarter of the 20th Century,” and that the Messenger and Agent of these Masters promised that a new “Impulse” would come out of Shambhalha, the stronghold of these Great Ones, to quicken the Spiritual Life of Mankind between 01975 and 2000 A.D.—and was it not prophesied by her that another Messenger, One perhaps even “better fitted”, would in this New Cycle be sent by her Brothers to the Occident? True enough, no one—himself too, and first of all—can mistake the Founding Secretary of The Blavatsky Foundation for this promised one!
Indeed, there are many—like this writer himself, up until a few days ago—who, quite naturally labor under the conviction that the principal “Impulse” promised for this Epoch can only be imparted and channeled by Shambhalha’s “Lodge” through one of its own chosen, one who would be—and would have to be—a Mahatma or an Initiate whom They were expected to “send to Europe or America” sometime in this quarter-century to initiate and head-up the prophesied “New Effort.” The basis of this belief is that H.P. Blavatsky prophesied just that. But what did she really say? The full and exact, definitive statement, most complete, is hard to come by (this writer was not able to find it upon searching the not-inconsiderable material to which he has immediate access).
Her explicit words were: “Let every member know, moreover, that the time for such priceless acquisition is limited. The writer of the present is old; her life is well-nigh worn out, and she may be summoned ‘home’ any day and almost any hour. And if her place is even filled up, perchance by another worthier and more learned than herself, still there remains but twelve years to the last hour of the term—namely, till December 31st, 1899. Those who will not have profited by the opportunity (given to the world in every last quarter of a century), those who will not have reached a certain point of psychic and spiritual development, or that point from which begins the cycle of adeptship, by that day—those will advance no further than the knowledge already acquired. No Master of Wisdom from the East will himself appear or send any one to Europe or America after that period, and the sluggards will have to renounce every chance of advancement in their present incarnation—until the year 1975. Such is the LAW, for we are in the Kali Yuga—the Black Age—and the restrictions in this cycle, the first 5000 years of which will expire in 1897, are great and almost insuperable.” (From HPB’s “First Preliminary Memorandum” to the Esoteric Section of the Theosophical Society, 1888; reprinted in The O.E. Library Critic, November 1931.)
There exist in HPB’s writings, other statements in allusion to the sending of such an emissary (thus, The Secret Doctrine, p. xxxviii of Volume One, declares, “In Century the Twentieth some disciple more informed, and far better fitted, may be sent by the Masters of Wisdom...”). But none are as explicit. Therefore, what conclusions must be drawn from this promise, this implied prophecy, when set against today’s circumstances and known facts?
First, before anything else, there is that Mme Blavatsky’s “prophecy” (if it can so be called) of the coming of a new “Torch-Bearer” was for the year 1975—not 1974 or before (eliminating numerous false pretenders, among whom are several tinsel stars in the murky firmament of organized Theosophy, ones who “jumped the gun” even though they never qualified for the race at all!). Neither was it for 1976 or later (not “until after 1975”), excluding others self-announced, too. The unequivocal dating conveyed in this quoted statement has been well-understood by all intelligent Theosophical scholars. Thus, in the “Publishers’ Preface” to The Theosophy Company’s 1925 reprint of The Secret Doctrine, we read: “The present edition of THE SECRET DOCTRINE marks, therefore, the mid-point of the centennial cycle of the Theosophical Movement between 1875 and 1975, when, according to the teachings of H.P. Blavatsky, a Messenger from the Great Lodge of Masters will again appear in the western world.” (One wonders what the editorial blue-pencil will do to this passage in any future printing—if not already.)
But why, it must be asked, did H.P. Blavatsky specify “1975” when, as a matter of indisputable historical record, in past centuries no “Messenger” (not even herself) was “sent” to Europe or America only in the 75th year of a century? Was not this specification deliberately made with intentional foresight that there was no likelihood of anyone so delegated being sent (“may be sent”) in the next cycle, the present; and that, therefore, the prospective faithful and active workers for the Cause in 10975 had to be alerted in order that when none did appear in this future year, they should waste no time in “waiting” beyond December 31st, 1975 (a “wait” that might well extend even to the year 2000), but ought instead to at once avail themselves of the help and impetus and opportunity afforded by the incoming “Impulse” and so themselves take up and shoulder the task and burden which then would be all too apparent (as, indeed, it was and is, as this writer himself made crystal-clear to all who saw his November 1975 messages!)?
What would have been the result if HPB had prophesied correctly, giving nought but the stark and terrible prospects truly foreseen by Those for Whom “the future is an open book”? Ought she have foretold that by 1975 the Society (and the organized “Movement” in all its collective, group aspects) would lay in ruins, fragmented, despoiled, shorn of its public credibility; that the initiative of the hour would have passed to “the dugpas”, the Shammar chieftains who by then would in person have invaded America itself, claiming it for Padmasambhava; that the outpost “Dzyan Dzongs” had been shut down—and the Tsong Kha Pa Avataras terminated with the tortured death of the last Tashi Lama, the Mahatmas’ Tibetan Protectors; and that in this coming epoch no Mahatma or Initiate-Agent was on the way (to meet a “united body” of welcomers and dedicated supporters who don’t exist!)—? Would not Truth, so prophesied, truth so strong and so bitter, quickly have strangled the “infant” in its 19th Century cradle? As it was, her promise or prophecy—such as it was—gave needed incentive and hope, a goal to work for (and which, if it had been pursued with diligence and fidelity to the principles then enunciated by HPB, might well have been successfully gained, despite all contrary probability!) even though the “Effort” (on the physical plane) already was known and privately confessed by the Masters to have been “forlorn” at its birth. But whether realized or not, the goal for the 20th Century, towards which the last Messenger set the vision of others, gave those who strived towards it an opportunity to advance in some measure their own spiritual welfare and understanding, as well as that of still others (like this writer, for one) who would follow in their footsteps. To be sure, a Mahatma will not flinch from waging a losing battle on behalf of his Cause even when he knows it to be forlorn at its start. But how few—ah, how few indeed! —will be those to join his enterprise! This is why anyone taking up service in Their Cause, has to be a long-range optimist and “incurably” so (like HPB herself, or unspoiled, child-like enthusiasm), even when being a short-range pessimist. (And does not “defeat” come to one and all of mortal origin—in the grave?) Nature indeed is merciful in laying bare the future only to the eyes of the Wise and of Sages who can see beyond many lifetimes of defeat to—the final victory!
Second, as a manifest conclusion also, there is what this writer himself wrote twenty-five months ago for “ ‘The New Torch-Bearer’—Why His Delay?”—: “If then, we cannot look to organize Theosophy to produce the expected ‘Messenger for the XXth Century’—where shall we look for him? Is he here at all? ...No, the chosen agent for this ‘next impulse’ is not here (there being no reason why he should be in hiding). He is certainly not coming in 1975 and, if we read the signs rightly, it will be some time yet before he does arrive...” Since this was written—though more than years have passed—nothing has surfaced which would invalidate or modify the truth of these words even though the anticipation (“it will be some time yet before he does arrive”) ought to be taken for what it was even then revealed to mean, viz., a hope predicated—much like HPB’s original “prophecy”—on anticipation that whenever this expected advent does transpire, whether “in a year or, as the present writer is inclined to suspect” (continuing the quotation from 1975), “it may be only after a seven-year trial for those who really want him to appear....” knowing more, as this writer now does of occult cycles and especially, of the formidable difficulty of finding anyone ready to accept for themselves such “a seven-year trial,” this writer today would be more apt to calculate this “trial for those who really want him to appear” as one that will be of 7 or 14 or even 17 (10 and 7) years!
But the emissaries of the one, everlasting “Dzyan Dzong” cannot be caught in the net of anyone’s calculations. Thus it could be that at any time such an Adept may appear openly, though only in answer to dreadful emergency, a menace of great gravity to Mankind in its progress towards its collective Spiritual Destiny. This would have to be the threat of a cataclysmic psychological disaster menacing the whole race, one that only a Great Master of Magick, acting as the focus for Shambhalha’s Mighty Power, could conquer; and it would have to be a crisis neither precipitated by the living nor generated by the evil of Humanity’s own accumulated Karma (thus eliminating the prospect of the Mahatmas’ phenomenal intervention in any case of an imminent danger of politically-originated, man-made universal thermonucleaur conflict). The writer has in mind something like a “rift” in “the Guardian Wall,” one which would subject the nations of earth and their masses to the total psychological (spiritual) subjugation of the “Ma-Mo Gods”, hideous and tremendous elemental forces masquerading as “Angels of Light,” as looked-for “Messiahs” or “Space Gods” coming to be worshipped by all people.
Whether the 20th Century will see such an Initiate-Messenger at all, has to remain a question itself. But it is no question whether the Messenger, prophesied by HPB and anticipated by many for some 89 years or more, is coming. He is not. For the promised Messenger was to be sent to Europe or America by the Chohans of the Brotherhood in 1975. There is every reason to accept and no reason to reject the definite conclusion that no Mahatma or emissary of the Brothers of H.P. Blavatsky came to the Western World in 1975. The promised Messenger of 1975 is not coming because Time itself has nullified the prophecy, and no Messenger of 1977 or 1978 or of any year thereafter can fulfill that prophecy and promise! This is the necessary third conclusion we must draw.
The fourth is simply this: as HPB said, the last-quarter of every century since the time of Tsong Kha Pa, has seen a special influx of Spiritually-oriented mystical knowledge penetrating the thought-world of the Occident, in origin moving from East-to-West, originating with that Brotherhood Whose Seat is Shambhalha. And a study of history confirms this. As this writer will be the first to reveal in detail and on the basis of historical documents, this claim can be magnificently vindicated, and in such a way that its full, hitherto-hidden import has yet to be otherwise appreciated. The originating Spiritual source and power for the timing of this periodic “Impulse” (the last quarter of each century) was first set in motion during the final quarter of the 14th Century by none other than that “Adept of Adepts,” the Mahachohan of Shambhalha, the Blessed Sakyamuni Himself, when, at the age of 18, the Great Spiritual Conqueror, incarnate as Tsong Kha Pa, entered into the year 1375 and impressed that first Cycle. Time and Nature “cooperated” on many levels, and the irresistible recurrency of this “Impulse” became successively strengthened at each new period of its manifestation. Like the unstoppable Juggernaut, this Wheel of the Good Law, thus set in motion by the Master of All Masters, is even now rolling down the centuries and can itself neither be slowed nor delayed nor deviated. Forged in Shambhalha and turning on its axle of Infinite Compassion, this “Impulse” reached the West again in 1975—its approaching thunder perceptive to attuned ears even earlier as it drew near. It is here now—and it will be with us until all its Spiritual momentum for Mankind’s Enlightenment in this century is at last exhausted.
The fifth conclusion, arising from all we can know concerning this, is that the Wise Chohan-Sons of Skyamuni, obedient to his Will and Wisdom and Edict, and one-with Nature herself in her beneficent subservience to the Higher Wisdom of him “Who First Turned the Wheel of the Good Law,” simply would never neglect to TRY—with every just and available means—to tap, channel and direct the undeniably extraordinary outflow of Occult and Spiritual stimulus which accompanies each and every return of this Cyclic Impulse. For Those irrevocably pledged to do Their all—even to “the endless end”—to help on the Spiritual Progress of Humanity, no such neglect is possible, even if and when the alternative avenues of action are forcibly reduced to the single possibility of utilizing for the periodic “Effort” other and lesser means than an Initiate or One of Their Own Number.
If, as guide, occult aspirants of this quarter-century are to receive no “Torch-Bearer” who also is an Initiate-Adept—one whose identity, surety and final mark of Mastery would be confirmed by his proven command of phenomenal powers of Spirit over Matter (paraphysical), Adeptic powers as were possessed by the last and previous Messengers—, it is not without precedent. This will not be the first time such a “Centennial Effort” has been pioneered and guided by a non-Initiate, nor the first to be led on a mundane level by one that is neither a trained nor untrained psychic or “sensitive.” Faced with no better “materials” or alternative (with merely “the best” of a “bad lot”!) as dictated by times and circumstances, and as so restricted by the Black and Evil Karma of the Age itself and its Humanity (howbeit, neither the times and circumstances nor the Karma being unforeseen), that Great Brotherhood of Humanity’s Teachers has before—as it can now again—taken resort to putting the lowliest available instrument to the highest possible use potentiality permits. And always, this instrument, with its distinctive range of potential and limits of use, is one commensurate with the stage and receptivity—and above all, with the need—of those who are to be taught; for no Master of Wisdom makes the mistake of throwing pearls before swine (though there are always some in every crowd!), of giving out more knowledge than can be assimilated and that will be put to Right Purpose. And no Master-Teacher attempts to lead his pupils to a higher stage of learning, forcing on them a more advanced lesson when they have not first assimilated their last one. Indeed, he then can only—by whatever means, even by a “substitute teacher”—draw again their attention and study to the undigested previous lesson; and he will take them back over it again and still again, it may be, until the first is rightly understood!
Thus it was in 1575-1600 A.D., following the death of Paracelsus (born in 1492 or 1493, during the first return of the quarter-century cycle after the 14th century initiative and edict of Tsong Kha Pa establishing it), that history shows the 16th century “Impulse” to have been channeled primarily in a prosaic accomplishment neither demanding nor receiving Initiatic guidance. This was the collection, codefication, printing and publication of all the writings of Paracelsus himself, done in commemoration of his birth, a birth which—significantly indeed—followed by only some ten years Gutenberg’s introduction into the Western World of printing from moveable type (though not a craft unknown to Tsong Kha Pa!). Here, there was no “new installment” of Occult Philosophy or Science, but a very necessary supportive undertaking focused wholly upon the previous “Effort”—and rightly so, for these printed writings of Paracelsus laid the groundwork for Rosicrucianism and Occult Masonry which were to follow and pave the way for the coming 19th Century Theosophy; and his teachings dominated and led Western Occultism for 300 years until H.P. Blavatsky and her Isis Unveiled in 1877.
Colonel Henry Steel Olcott is another instance of a non-Initiate being chosen by the Masters to co-head an “Effort” insofar as leading the exoteric (group-vehicle) aspect of the channeled “Impulse” (the Theosophical Society of 1875). And it was his duty to provide the chief support in the outer world for the Initiate-Agent. Thus it was that, in October 1874, the Colonel—a man of many failings, and one whose name is now anathema to most centers of organized Theosophy in the world today—, began his service, limited though it would prove to be, as a necessary instrument in the employ of that Great Brotherhood. As the Mahatma Morya put it, “In casting above we found in America a man... far from being the best, but... he was the best available.”
WHAT OCCULT CYCLIC-CHRONOLOGY REVEALS
As will be shown in the forthcoming treatise, Signals from Shambhalha, numerous Occult Cycles can be found recurring and culminating, synchronous with important key-events in the career of Madame Blavatsky, extending on into the history of the Theosophical Society and Movement down to the time of the inception of the “New Effort” itself—and, finally, correlating in most extraordinary precision with crucial days in the life of this writer and of his work for her Cause. Some of these are Astrological (astronomical and planetary); others encompass years by 7’s and 10’s; and still others center upon “midpoints in time,” involving symmetrical time-periods as determined by cumulative revolutions of the Earth (the study of which this writer—as far as is known—is the first to pioneer, as addition to his exclusive discoveries, and one which will be disclosed in depth for the first time in the upcoming treatise). However, even what here follows must be recognized, as of now, to be the most impressive, thorough-going evidence summoned into print anywhere by anyone at any time in support of Madame Blavatsky’s teachings of the importance of the Septenary and other Occult Cycles, especially as relating to her Mission and its aftermath.).
Among these correlations, we may consider, for instance, the timing of this writer’s first (and still only) conscious perception of a “Signal from Shambhalha”—in October 1974. Falling in that year and month, it accompanies the centennial (10x10) of Colonel Olcott’s initial meeting with Madame Blavatsky, at Chittenden, Vermont, on October 17, 1874 (when, recalls the Mahatma M., “We... brought them together—and the trial began.” Mahatma Letter, No. 44). The nadir or midpoint of this 100-year cycle (1874-1974) fell in 1924, this writer’s birth-year, and only 60 days from his birth.
There is every reason to believe that this unprecedented experience of October 23, 1974, would not have taken place without a decisive act this writer initiated 130 days earlier, June 14, 1974. On this “red letter day” for the “New Effort” and in the life of The Blavatsky Foundation, its Secretary telephoned its President, proposing for the first time that all the organization’s resources be marshaled for an effort to expose the Bharati attack and to combat the Black (Left-Hand) Tantrik campaign, which that attack was leading aggressively against HPB and her Theosophy as the chief barrier to the Black Tantrikas’ ambitious designs to conquer “the Soul of the West” (a menace today paralleling that of Spiritualism at the time when HPB and the Colonel met at the Eddy’s séances in Vermont). This writer’s proposal was at once officially adopted and set underway when Mr. Endersby promised and sent a loan of one hundred dollars to help defray Foundation research expenses of this project (gifts by Directors being under legal restriction). From the inception of this undertaking, June 14, 1974, to the date of this writer’s birth in 1924 is 49 years (7x7) plus ten (10) months, counting backward in time. Again counting back 49 years and 10 months from this birthdate in 1924, brings us to October 14, 1874, the day of the first HPB-HSO meeting when that “trial” of the 19th Century Effort for Shambhalha began! Taking this as a good illustration of this writer’s exclusive discovery of the occult principle of “symmetrical midpoints in Time,” we find that the date of birth followed by 18,201 days (Earth revolutions, imprinting the “Astral Light”) that of the Chittenden meeting of 1874; and June 14, 1974 followed this birthdate again exactly by 18,201 days (making the time of birth the precise midpoint of a total interval of 36,403 days, thus establishing odds of 36,403-against-1 for such a meaningful “coincidence” to have happened by chance alone!).
October 14, 1874 itself fell within the very month culminating a 7-year cycle that had begin in 1867 when, on the field of the Battle of Mentana (November 2), Helena Blavatsky was “left for dead” as another casualty in the ranks of General Garibaldi—only to revive and, after a period of recuperation, to leave early in 1868 for Tibet, escorted by an emissary the Mahatmas had sent to get her. This began the final period of psychological preparation for her Mission as a conscious Message-Bearer of Shambhalha; and it marked the close of her outer life as one free to pursue any purpose other than an objective secondary to this Mission. The Centenary of the Battle of Mentana closed in 1967 when, on November 2nd—and with no prior instruction, intent, or request—the Secretary of State of the State of California granted to this writer exclusive right to use the then officially-registered name of this Foundation, the first legal action in relation thereto (The Blavatsky Foundation being the one legal entity now existing, that holds—as time will show—a primary responsibility as one kind of vehicle for Shambhalha’s Message to this present Cycle).
In Occult Chronology and the technicality of Cycles, the 7th year of the 10th Septenary Cycle (the 70th year, the proverbial “three-score-and-ten” or 7x10) seems to be especially pregnant with potential. In his first published work in defence of Madame Blavatsky, this writer in 1947 called attention to this when he wrote: “To every Theosophist, it will be significant that the scurrilous barrage under discussion was launched at HPB in the seventh year of the tenth septenary cycle of her first publication!” (this “seventh” year running from September 29, 1946 to September 29, 1947, Priestess of the Occult having been published about the beginning of November 1946). When this observation was penned, its author had in view only the Williams book itself as a monumental collection of all preceding attacks and as a mischevious “biography” likely never to be outdone. By hindsight, however, what was more “significant” by way of cyclic-chronology was that 1947 brought this writer’s second vow, to work publicly for HPB’s final vindication, and it was also saw (coincident with the Spring Equinox) the beginning of that public endeavor. Thus 1947 minus 70 years, 1877. Similarly, 1940 (the year this writer’s discovery of Theosophy via Isis Unveiled, and of his first vow)—and, to be exact, July 4th, 1940 (perhaps even the very day that vow was taken)—began the 7th year of the 10th Septenary Cycle following July 4, 1871, when HPB had returned from Tibet to the West, prepared to undertake her destined Mission. Likewise, the writer’s birth-year, 1924, minus 70 goes back to 1854, which first found her on the frontier-lands of Tibet, premature in her youthful enthusiasm to seek out and serve the World-Center of the Mahatmas’ Brotherhood.
The 7th year of the 10th Septenary Cycle following Mme Blavatsky’s own birth-year, ended on August 12, 1901 and began in 1900 (the 70th anniversary of her physical conception), and the first year following “the last hour of the term.” It was the “last hour of the term,” the day of December 31, 1899, that witnessed the death of Dr. Elliott Coues, the ex-Theosophist who had entered into direct conspiracy with the Coulombs, with William E. Coleman (HPB’s most tenacious critic) and with other chief adversaries of HPB, in order to destroy the latter’s public image; and it was Coues who was the only accuser she haled into a court of law for her self-defence. This date plus 70 years brings us to December 31st, 1969 (also the 84th anniversary—7x12—of the “Hodgson Report,” the S.P.R. Committee Report of December 1885). In that same month, this writer’s defence of Mme Blavatsky against that Report, and in rebuttal to the Thouless review of the Waterman book, was published in that same Society’s Journal—until now, a high-water-mark of the public defence of the reputation Coues sought to destroy!
The “last hour of the term” preceding that of 1875-1899, had struck December 31st, 1799, closing the period of opportunity that had been open to the 18th Century “Effort.” This termination itself generated a very important new Occult Cycle, beginning with the year 1800, its first—a Septenary Cycle peaking each succeeding 7th year. At its 10th recurrence (its first 70-year mark), in 1870, this Cycle was “awakened” or activated to greater expression of its potentiality by the first “foreshadowing” of the future transmission of information from Shambhalha to the Western World. In November of 1870, Helena Blavatsky then being absent in Tibet, the first known Mahatma Letter (in the handwriting of the Master K.H.) was delivered (phenomenally, it would seem) to her aunt, promising HPB’s return home. The second 70-year return of this major cycle (1800 plus 70 plus 70) fell in 1940 (the 7th year of this 20th Septenary Cycle having begun in November 1939), during which this writer discovered Isis Unveiled, Theosophy, HPB, and the controversies surrounding her—and vowed to find out the truth about all of it!
From that point (1940) on, the Septenary influence of this
important Cycle has been especially pronounced upon this writer’s work for HPB
and her Cause, each subsequent 7th year-point being marked by
distinct, successive, upward steps of progressive and accelerated activity. Thus
1946, the closing year of the First septenary sub-cycle (which began in
1940), brought the Williams book and this writer’s personal letter of rebuttal
and challenge to the authoress; the first year of the Second septenary
sub-cycle (1947) saw the beginning of his public defence work in the publication
of this rebuttal (accepted and printed only after having been first rejected by
all three of America’s major Theosophical publishing houses), together with
Williams’ written refusal to defend the book, and, subsequently, the
challenger’s vow to make public all his findings for HPB, followed by the
rejection of his proposal—undoubtedly the first ever of its kind—for a joint
Defence Committee of Representative Theosophist-historians of every affiliation.
The last year of the 2nd Septenary sub-cycle, 1953, brought his
decision to sacrifice his only source of assured income (an 11-year job) in
order to give more time to her defence (after all else had failed, and when no
financial help was in sight); while the first year of the Third septenary
sub-cycle (1954) saw this decision implemented. The last year of the
4th sub-cycle (1967) brought him the idea and decision to organize
The Blavatsky Foundation (followed by official registration of the name) when
twenty years of sad experience (especially after the Waterman book had appeared
four years earlier) had proved to him over-and-over again that, collectively,
the organized centers of Theosophy alone could not be counted upon to publicize
and to support the publication of his HPB Defence, an unwillingness confirmed
the same year in the rejection of his proposal that a Board of Directors for the
Foundation be composed of representatives of each prominent Theosophical center
(again, he was forced to “go-it-alone”). 1968, first year of the
Fifth septenary sub-cycle saw The Blavatsky Foundation established,
followed within 90 days by the thunderclap of the most widespread, notorious
attack aimed at HPB and her Theosophy (and, indeed this one, at all
Theosophists, too) since the “Hodgson Report” of 83 years earlier, the
multi-media-circulated “Manual for Revolution” canard (against which the
counter-response of the understaffed, under-financed Blavatsky Foundation, in
quality and results, far exceeded the combined defensive reaction of all the
other centers, of organized Theosophy collectively). The last year of this
5th sub-cycle (1974) saw Bharati, armed with forgery and falsehood,
running interference for the Black Tantrikas against H.P. Blavatsky, her
Adept-Brothers, and their Teachings; and the year brought to this writer—after
his decision to fully oppose this psychological subversion of the West—his first
conscious impression of a “Signal from Shambhalha.” The first year of the
Sixth Septenary sub-cycle (the last that has taken place),
1975—coincidental with the Centennial of the Theosophical Society—saw
preparation (November 8, 1975) of this writer’s first public response to the
beginning of the 1975-2000 Occult Cycle, and publication of this response with
its rallying call to all to meet the challenge of the New Centennial Effort,
parallel with the incoming “Impulse” from the Brotherhood of Arhats (a call
that has heard not the slightest echo from within the centers of organized
Theosophy, but which has cost The Blavatsky Foundation dearly in much-needed
support, as we shall soon see!).
As after the 140-year reactivation of this Occult Cycle in 1940, when the most significant events subsequently pertaining to it in this century have all involved the work this writer has done in the Cause of the Masters, so also after the first major reactivation in 1870, there followed at 7-year intervals the major relevant events of the 19th century focusing exclusively upon HPB and her Mission. These were, in 1877, the publication of Isis Unveiled and H.P. Blavatsky’s start as World-Teacher; in 1884, the Coulomb-missionary attack, the appointment of the S.P.R. Committee to investigate Theosophical phenomena, and the arrival at Theosophical headquarters in India of that Committee’s agent, Dr. Hodgson, to begin his “inquires”; and, in 1891, the death of HPB herself and the close of her Mission as Shambhalha’s last Messenger.
This year of 1977 has marked, of course, the end of the 7th year of the 10th Septenary Cycle(s) begun in 1907 with the death of Colonel Olcott and the subsequent election that same year of Mrs. Annie Besant to the Presidency of his Theosophical Society, starting the 27-year Besant-Leadbeater hegemony, a reign of personal domination crippled only by the Krishnamurti defection in 1929 and ended by Mrs. Besant’s death in 1933—1933 being 7 years before this writer discovered Theosophy and 14 years before he began his public work. The year that saw the beginning of this latter, 1947, marked also the Centenary (10x10) of Mrs. Besant’s birth in 1847. Viewed by dispassionate hindsight, history cannot but show that the dominant post-Blavatsky pace-setter for organized group-Theosophy, with all its diverse bizarre teachings and outré performances during the final 84 (12x7) years (1891-1975) of the cycle that began in 1875, was Annie Besant. To what extent the continuing, parasitic influence of her “message”—such as it was, coming form the “world-teacher” of what is best called Pseudo-Theosophy—will be offset in the twin-spheres of public thought and popular occultism by the Message to which this writer has fallen heir for this New Cycle, only time will tell.
As the birthday of this writer follows by 12 days that of Colonel Olcott and by 2 that of H.P. Blavatsky herself, so that of his brother and fellow-Director of the Foundation falls on October 1st, Mrs. Besant’s birthday. No one living or dead has extended more charity, support and uncomplaining tolerance towards the continuation of this writer’s life-work and of The Blavatsky Foundation itself, than has this only blood-brother, though for him (howbeit, no Theosophist), the cost has been one of mounting personal debts and ill-health (chronic hypertension). It is no wonder then that we find he was born in 1927 within 72 hours of the exact nadir of the 100-year Cycle which culminates in 1977 and began on September 29, 1877. (And it was also in that same month and year that The Blavatsky Association first published Kingsland’s booklet, Was She a Charlatan?—a rebuttal which, after the lapse of 41 years, marked the first renewal of serious research in Mme Blavatsky’s Defence, and for years served as this writer’s primary (and almost only) source of inspiration for his own beginnings defence-work.)
Equal in importance with the Seventh year of the Tenth Septenary Cycle (10x7) as shown, is the Seventh year of the Seventh Septenary Cycle (7x7) or the 49th year. Thus, on June 14, 1974—when this writer made the one decision which, he feels, was of greater interest than any other to the Arhat-Sentinels of Shambhalha and Their Supreme Chief—, this writer’s last birthday had been his 49th.
It is instructive to note the decisive events relating significantly to her Mission, which have manifested in the 7th year of the Seventh Sub-Septenary Cycle of each 49-year period subsequent to Mme Blavatsky’s own birth in 1831, there now having been three such years. The first of these—her 49th year of life—began August 12, 1879 and ended August 12, 1880. During this twelve-month span of time, the two leaders of the modern Theosophical movement (HPB and HSO) celebrated their first year together in India, and saw the start of The Theosophist, affording the first continuous vehicle for HPB’s writings. During this time their Society held its first Annual Convention (at which was first introduced the declaration of Universal Brotherhood as a goal); and, though having hardly “got off” until then, so that it had issued only two Section Charters in its first four years, the organization was to grow to eleven Sections by the end of 1880. It was also in this narrow time-zone that the Coulombs, of sinister future promise first appeared on the scene and ensconced themselves in Society Headquarters, while almost coincidentally with their arrival came their own future nemesis, Damodar K. Mavalankar (whom HPB later was to say had been the only chela not to fail wholly or partially), his arrival begin only nine days before this 49th year began—prematurely sensitive, it would seem, to the incoming, culminating year. It was in December 1879 that the Great Teacher, journeying to the Sinnett home at Allahabad, first met A.P. Sinnett and A.O. Hume, this association, renewed at her next visit, giving rise in October 1880 to the beginning of the celebrated Mahatma-correspondence with Sinnett and Hume, the teaching thus initiated in turn leading first to the publication of Sinnett’s The Occult World and, later, Esoteric Buddhism, then to The Secret Doctrine, and finally to the 1923 publication of the Mahatma letters of the correspondence itself.
The second 49-year Cycle (the 14th Septenary or 49-plus-49, the 98th year) from HPB’s birth closed on August 12, 1929. Nearing the end of this critical, culminating year, the day of August 3rd marked the first 24-hours of the 7th year of the 14th Septenary Cycle, the first day beginning the 98th year, followed the birth of Colonel Olcott. Additionally, August 3, 1929 was the exact day of the 50th Anniversary of Damodar’s initiation into the Theosophical Society, the nadir-point of a century begin August 3, 1879. And on August 3rd, 1929, nine days before the culmination of this 14th Septenary Cycle since HPB’s birth, Jiddu Krishnamurti announced to a thunderstruck gathering of thousands and to a radio audience of many thousands that he was renouncing the role of “chosen vehicle for the Returning Christ,” a part for which Annie Besant and C.W. Leadbeater for some 20 years had been coaching, rehearsing and preparing him, while bombarding the world all the while with florid prophecies of “the Second Advent”! Neither Mrs. Besant nor her Pseudo-Theosophy ever fully recovered from this sudden shattering blow. And twenty-three days prior to that, the Judge-Tingly “lineage” suffered the loss of its living “mouthpiece of the Masters” (through whom the dead H.P.B. and W.Q. Judge were said to have “spoken”—!!), when in Sweden Mrs. Katherine Tingley, one-time professional “spirit-medium”, died after an automobile accident.
The seventh year of the 21st Septenary Cycle of this Grand Occult Cycle originating August 12, 1831, began on August 12, 1977 and ends one year later. The 49th day of this culminating year of the Third 49-year period (1831-plus-49-plus-49-plus-49) is also the exact Centenary Date or the 100th “Birthday” of Isis Unveiled which itself marked the actualization of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky’s Mission as World-Teacher for Shambhalha. Within this year and within 96 hours of this date, this writer first became fully cognizant of the unique and special relationship existing between his work and Shambhalha’s “Effort of Enlightenment” for 1975-2000 A.D.
WHAT THIS CENTENARY CIRCULAR ORIGINALLY WAS MEANT TO BE
When in last September the Secretary of The Blavatsky Foundation set about to prepare a circular celebrating this Centenary date—in commemoration of that great masterwork of Occultism which had so crucial an impact upon his life and its subsequent guidance—, he had in mind to demonstrate his inmost gratitude to its authoress and to her World-Mission which its publication began in 1877, by promising the most he then thought he possibly could do in the future service of that World-Mission and its Message. This was a promise, a plan, a project, looming ever larger in his mind and affections. It was to be the announcement—for the first to all Foundation supporters—of an intention to establish an international group-vehicle of a form and for a purpose unique, one designed and structured to exclusively defend and promulgate the Teachings solely of HPB and her Adept-Brothers as these were put on record prior to May 8, 1891, and as the available facts of history ca be marshaled to defend the Great Teacher, all her works and all her career.
Against all predilection, and contrary to 36 years of personal resistance to becoming involved in any way in group-activities teaching Theosophy on a public scale, this writer in 1976 had found developing circumstances forcing him towards conceiving and adopting this indicated plan. By that year there remained in America no center of organized Theosophy nor any prominent Theosophist (but one) outside of the Foundation itself, that had not voluntarily severed support of this Foundation, so that there no longer existed any reason for reluctance on this writer’s part against raising up what those might have considered “competition.” It was then, too, that he first began to comprehend the desperate, urgent need which exists to acquaint the public with the UNBRIDGEABLE CHASM which separates the One True Theosophy of Madame Blavatsky from all the Pseudo-Theosophies promoted by organized Theosophy!
At present, the fact is that there nowhere exists on a national or international scale any formal fellowship or open group-vehicle qualified by declaration of purpose, structure and dedicated activity to serve either as the kind of deliberate channel required to provide Mankind with guidance towards and study of the pristine, unadulterated Teachings (Philosophy, Science and Ethics) given through the agency of the living HPB, nor such a vehicle as is prepared to assume the role of carrying to the people the historical teachings intended by Shambhalha to be a “Guardian Wall” built up in the 25-year Cycle now upon us, a defence-wall for protection of the purity and of the sole perpetuation of that 1875-1891 Message and the truth about its Messenger, the only truth which can disenthrall untold numbers of aspirants, inquirers and truth-seekers from confusing the phony and the false from the Real Theosophy! In gorging a plan to remedy this intolerable situation—one which finds those true and faithful to Theosophy solely as taught by HPB and her Adept-Brothers, however few and scattered over the Earth these lonely “Blavatsky-ites” may be, without any formal body to encompass their numbers or to channel their desires and efforts collectively towards the sharing of these Unique Teachings without admixture and without diminution, while everywhere around them can be seen schools for Judge-ites, Tingley-ites, de Purucker-ites, Crosbie-ites, Bailey-ites, Besant-ites and Leadbeater-ites, et all.—, this writer progressed so far as even to distinguish a target-date of appropriate astrological potential which might best be chosen for the beginning of such a Blavatsky establishment (The Blavatsky Foundation itself being legally limited to seven members only, Directors).
After some days, the text of the intended circular was prepared and almost ready for typing (indeed, the same typewriter on which were done our printed mss since 1974 was actually rented and brought in for that purpose—though never once touched during the ensuing month of rental, as this present ms began to extend by successive stages, resulting in the first and only shameful waste of Foundation money, twenty dollars no less, for which we have been guilty in nigh ten years!). All was progressing towards the target-date for mailing with a September 29, 1977 postmark. And then, suddenly, all was changed when—“out of the clear blue sky”—this writer was struck first with the depressing blast of a thunderhead, and next with an unexpected flash of lightening so brilliant that it illuminated 37 years and more of his past and even some of his future, putting his whole life with its duty and its work into a new, revealing light!
The initial realization began to emerge when
he sat down one day to tally-up the 1977 donations to the Foundation and to
compile a list of current donors to whom the circular would be sent. What he
then found was this (brought down to this date): Contributions received in
1977 (477 Dollars) have declined 21 percent from the 1976 total of general
donations (1976 itself having been down 23 percent from 1975). Thus, 1977 marks
the lowest point The Blavatsky Foundation income has reached during
any year of its existence, now some nine years and nine months! During 1977
the expenditures have exceeded the income by 459 Dollars, and if it were
not for an exceptionally generous donation by one especially sympathetic
supporter at the very end of last year (responding to our December 1976 Report),
the Foundation would have gone heavily into the red—or this writer, as guiding
Director, would have had to quickly abandon his fruitful research
activity—doubtless missing all the extraordinary progress in historical
discovery 1977 now has brought—and would have been compelled to devote much
valuable time to no more than dollar-chasing projects! Categorized, these
Expenditure in 1977 have been: Preparation Costs, 498 Dollars (Purchasing
of Research Literature, 464; Photocopies, 34). Dissemination Costs, 438
Dollars (Printing, 67; Mailing and P.O. Box, 47; Telephone, 99; Stationary and
Office Equipment, including rentals, 225). (During the closing year, this
writer's personal income has not reached 200 Dollars—including birthday and
holiday cash gifts, but not counting some expressly so from supporters, most of
which latter sums were funneled directly into the Foundation as tax-deductible
donations by the givers. It is also to be repeated that no Director (Office,
Member) of The Blavatsky Foundation obtains any remuneration for exclusion of
his duties.
One aspect of this 1977 accounting cannot be
overemphasized. This is that without the indicated special gift of late
December, 1976, this writer during the year now closing would have been so
damnably distracted by purely financial pressures upon the Foundation (with its
on-going needs for the purchase of research literature, and all its related
operating expenses) that he would have had to divert a great portion of his
attention, time and creative thought away from research itself and into
the problem of devising means somehow to quickly attract new supporters by some
form of inexpensive public advertising, by the preparation of one or more
Newsletters, etc. There would have been no alternative to this, simply
because—he is happy to say, and in all humility of gratitude notices and
reports, that—though the quantity of numbers is greatly wanting, the few number
of faithful supporters The Blavatsky Foundation did have in 1977 is outstanding
for the total average of each individual's donation. This average sum
contributed in 1977 to the Foundation by its current and continuing donors is
the highest average recorded since 1968 (53 dollars). Hence, the
Directors have nothing but the deepest sense of gratitude and thankfulness for
this much-appreciated support, comparatively generous in every case (one
co-worker who has not worked in a year sent fifteen dollars!). Hence, had there
been an urgent need to supplement the total donation of these few, these all--as
there doubtless will be in 1978—, this writer could not conscionably have
pressed notice of that need upon all who have been so faithful according to
their means!
And that this writer was not so diverted serves to
illustrate how unanticipated, unforseen, positive dividends can come from a
donor’s contribution, a co-worker’s sacrifice (as, indeed, this saving gift
was)—quite beyond the more mundane reward of knowing the Foundation’s on-going
expenses will be financially met and its unique activity continued. In this case
it meant that this writer was able to devote one of the longest continuous
periods of his life to uninterrupted, intensely concentrated research and
discovery for the Blavatsky Defence. The result was that on two occasions (March
11th, the very day preceding the first of the Foundation’s
10th year; and on September 25th) he made two discoveries
in this study which can only be characterized as: (i) the two most astonishing,
unexpected, of his 37 years of work for HPB; and (ii) two of the three or four
most important he has ever made—or he or anyone in the future is ever likely to
make—concerning HPB, her career and her Mission. Either one of these he
considers to be of greater present value and future potential for the Cause of
HPB, than all the results of all the probing thought brought to bear on these
subjects by generations of past Theosophists. These two treasures alone he would
not trade for all the material wealth in all the coffers of organized Theosophy
from its exoteric inception, for the finding of neither could have been
purchased even if one had the accumulated wealth of Christendom itself to
squander—and because Truth itself (especially when one has made Truth his
“only Goal, Guide, God” since the age of 15) is its own highest reward, and the
finding of it yields truly the most sublime satisfaction short of that enjoyed
in the Arhat’s Samadhi!
Thus it is that The Blavatsky Foundation survives 1977—by the grace of
charity of its American, Canadian and English supporters, though currently
only 10 in number!
COUNTING THE COST
“The grandest sport in the world is to champion an
unpopular cause when you
know you are right!”—Theodore
Roosevelt.
In light of the foregoing figures, it is obvious that the present
penurious state of the Foundation’s funding, and the severe continuing decline
in donations received, results from one thing only: a serious loss of
previous supporters. In examination, what this writer found most profoundly
depressing—being too preoccupied earlier in the year even to think much about
it—was the stark fact that 90 percent of the Foundation’s past donors (82-91,
including 9 supporting groups, local or national) have deserted, and no longer
contribute anything at all to the support of its activities! For about 24
hours after seeing this, this writer hovered in the shadows of black pessimism,
chill with despair. What had he done wrong to neglect these 82 parties, to cool
their ardor, to kill their interest and to antagonize or drive them away? What
should have been done differently, what said that was not said, what unsaid that
was? Ought there to have been more Newsletters? More pleas, more begging? In
trying to organize his thoughts and comprehend the meaning of this great loss,
the Secretary got out all the old address files and Donation Receipts, tracing
back the record of each donor to the beginning or the end of his or her term of
contributing (as well as the several Theosophical groups, local, national and
international, which first came and then fell away). At the same time, a first
attempt was made to correlate the fluctuating level and loss in numbers of
supporters with the volume of published material freely issued to donors. (This
was found to consist of 7 Newsletters and 20 different Circulars, Press
Releases, reports, etc., during the 1969-1976 period, pr better than three per
year).
At this point, what emerged was discovery that of the total of 90
supporters gained during the first three years of 1968-70, only one remains; and
from the years of biggest gain in numbers, 1970-71 (when 56 new donors
appeared), only three remain (a 95 percent loss)! But the timing of these
losses was most significant of all, yielding the true key to understanding this
situation.
As 1970 and 1971 saw the biggest gain, so 1971 and 1972 manifest also the
greatest loss of numbers—42, but of whom 30 (curiosity-seekers, one might call
them) never made a second contribution. On the other hand, the yearly losses of
those making more than one donation, were found to be: 1970 (1); 1972
(5); 1973 (3); 1974 (4); 1975 (12); 1976 (5); 1977 (5). The losses for the five
years, 1970-74, totals 20; so that the average normal “attrition rate” must be
taken as 4-per-annum. But during the three years, 1975-77, the total and the
average shoot up to 22 and 7.3 (up 300 percent in 1975 alone!)—and this
was during a period when the total of contributors was even lower, beforehand,
than at any time in the earlier five years!
There is but one explanation for this sudden, remarkably steep rise in
desertions. Of the 21 donors lost in 1975-79 (17 repeat donors and 4
one-shot contributors), 4 gave only once and prior to receiving one or
another Foundation Report defending HPB as an occult authority on Tibet (either
Report counter-attacking Bharati, or Bharati and de Zirkoff). Of those who
previously had donated two or more times (some for years, and all before
the appearance of the October 1974 first installment of “Madame Blavatsky and
Occult Tibet,” by this writer), 8 dropped out after getting this critique
on Black-Patch Tantrism; and 9 others never again gave anything after
seeing our November 1975 circulars critical of de Zirkoff, the Dalai Lama, and
of organized Theosophy. The foremost fact is that The Blavatsky Foundation went
into October 1974 with 27 repeat-donors. It came out of November 1975, losing 17
(in the interim picking up 5 new donors, of whom only one continued to
contribute into 1976).
In summary, the release during 1974 and 1975 of this writer’s Reports
defending Mme Blavatsky as an authority on “Tantra and Occult Tibet” cost this
Foundation an unprecedented loss, the loss of 63 percent of its “hardcore”
supporters, its erstwhile repeat-donors! Here was proof the Foundation’s
only unusual and substantial loss of proven support during its first decade had
followed in response to its Secretary’s 1974-75 counter-attack of criticism
against the Tantriks of the Black Path (those whose “adepts” were referred to by
Mme Blavatsky as “The Brothers of the Shadow”), and against those so-called
theosophical authorities and experts and centers who fraternize—or whose views
and sympathies run parallel to, or openly coincide—with the “Dugpas,” their
apologists and followers, the prime example of the “compromisers” being Boris de
Zirkoff as one-with Professor Bharati in picturing HPB (and her assisting
Brother-Arhats, of course) as a bungling ignoramus on the subject of
Tibet and its Buddhist doings. In other words, in taking up here the Defence of
HPB and her Brothers, this writer was courting precisely the disaster his
foresight had indicated in November 1975 when he wrote: “...we do not shirk the
duty that has fallen to our lot—even though we well know the first reward
will be more enemies and fewer friends.” Still, in choosing to knock down
error—whatever it is, and wherever found, when the last Messenger of Shambhalha
is the intended target—, this writer has to be the first to admit that this
“first reward” (even yet perhaps not fully “paid”!), in costing this Foundation
two-thirds of its trusted supporters in less than two years, has been even more
than anticipated! To him it indicates that the trustworthy core of pupils
irrevocably dedicated to HPB and to her Cause, and who can be rallied to its
Defence, is—and will prove to be—even smaller than heretofore suspected. This
seeming foolhardiness in upholding Truth in place of giving out only what
serves to pleasantly tickle the ears of an audience, also had brought
expressions of warning and trepidation from one or two closest acquaintances.
Nevertheless, total comprehension of the results, had as these seemed, at once
(in Sept.) changed this writer’s passing mood from one of black to white, from
severe self-reproach, to one of buoyant elation. It was like a sharp, keep
breeze dissipating a summer thunderhead. And the sun shone bright, indeed—for he
now understood that it was not because he had failed or had done wrong,
but was the inevitable consequence of doing right; it was that
inescapable “price” one has to “pay” for being on the right side and for
conveying truth to those who want it not!
To be rejected, denigrated, curst and cast out, to be deserted for
this is the greatest reward any truth-server can ever expect from “the
brutal herd”—by whatsoever name and under whatever religious banner it goes
(“Theosophists,” “Esoteric Buddhists,” “Blavatsky-ites” or what-not)! Here the
writer can do no better than to repeat what he said almost seven years ago when
he wrote (in “Cheap at Any Price...”): “A quarter-century of sometimes sad,
sometimes bitter experience in sounding the battle-cry to rally true believers
and faithful followers to the supreme defence of their declared Teacher—often
only to witness a potential defender turn away unhearing, or to see another
better equipped for battle by position or means, deaf to entreaty—has burned
upon our consciousness one occult maxim before all others. The closer one sticks
to the facts, the more one cherishes truth and only the truth, and the higher
the barrier is raised to keep out the phony, the false and the phantasmagoric,
the fewer will be those who welcome the message and the lesser the number
that will support the Cause.”
Even in Madame Blavatsky’s day, one Mahatma lamented, “Our numbers are
diminishing.” Such a difficulty on the higher level is no more than a reflection
of what is taking place on the lowest—the Dark Age “toll.” How to recruit
replacements for the lowest ranks is a problem which must be squarely faced.
At last, this writer reluctantly has to admit that Mme Blavatsky’s “Defence” is
a non-productive and poor program to push upon non-Theosophists,
those who have little or no knowledge of HPB, who she was or what
she taught; and who, consequently, have no interest in nor feel any duty
towards her defence. Indeed, most “Theosophists” themselves could be
placed in this category of the ignorant and the non-grateful! On the other hand,
nearly ten years’ effort by The Blavatsky Foundation to excite support of this
Defence among Theosophists at large (and 30 years as the world-leader of this
Defence, having intercourse with the heads of all major Theosophical groups)
have proven dramatically to this writer the ineffectuality of gaining any
sustained and decisive recognition or support by its collective leadership and
its following. In light of these formidable impediments, The Blavatsky
Foundation in 1968 boxed itself in—painted itself into a corner, so to speak—by
its refusal to put itself into open public competition with the organized
centers of Theosophy, in its neglecting to adopt a program of public
education designed to enlighten non-Theosophists as to who HPB was and what
she taught, and how this Teaching can be found, studied and assimilated
(thereby making her Defence a meaningful, personal, self-gratifying
duty). To rectify this omission will be one of the Foundation’s
primary projects, beginning in 1978.
Meanwhile, in September 1977 this writer emerged from his study of the
current situation, of its facts and figures, with realization that it was wholly
premature—as it was preposterous at this point in time, wholly
“pie-in-the-sky”—to “announce” and extoll plans for the establishment of a
public group-vehicle for any purpose at all when, as now, The Blavatsky
Foundation has only 10 hard-core supporters (or co-workers, as this writer likes
to think), and these (one for each of its 10 years!) are scattered in three
countries (while only one state of this nation has more than one, and that not
California, where the center of any such proposed organization probably would
have to be incorporated and by at least three persons to accomodate the
law!)
Moreover, it is against all reason to suggest that this writer, with a
clutch of books yet to be written—and some underway, others long-researched in
HPB’s Defence (one of these remains unfinished after 30 years, in part because
of just such diversionary undertakings best left to others)—, and with his long
record of tried and proven mastery of research and discovery in that Defence,
when now in the autumn of life and besieged by duties already assumed in this
Cause, ought to lessen this on-going contribution and throw himself into an
altogether new line of endeavor, however necessary this latter may be to the
Spiritual success of this Cycle. No, the indicated building of a national and
international group-vehicle for the assigned purposes, is a labor which must in
time be done, but it must be seized upon and set into motion by many willing
hands, many younger and more vigorous than his, which latter can only point to
the guide-posts that must be followed. There are instructions essential to safe
and lasting purpose which only can be summoned by a path-finder who already has
penetrated to the nethermost the maze of occult and theosophical history
available. This is history replete with hard and bitter lessons to be learned, a
past dark with horrible examples of self-deception, imposture and
failure. Woe to be those in this or any cycle who ignore these lessons!
THE AWAKENING, SEPTEMBER 25, 1977
In 1974-75-76, this writer certainly began to realize that he, in his
work for HPB, was powerfully under the sway of the incoming “New
Impulse”—because most of the “signs” he himself already for years had
anticipated would reliably mark the advent of the new “Messenger” were almost
daily becoming more indelibly present and manifest in what he was doing and
planning to do under the forcible impact of extraordinary developments beyond
his personal intention or control. At the same time he fully recognized that
two or three of these essential identifying “signs” or authoritative “marks”
could not be related to himself, but only to one Who would have to be an
Initiate-Adept coming from Shambhalha. Aside from these absent latter “signs”
which would “mark” any authentic Messenger-Adept as one commanding the Mastery
of Occult Powers and as one having physical and psychic intercourse at-will with
that Hidden Center of Occult Supremacy, all of the others are now clearly
stamped upon this writer and his work. Still thinking the hoped-for “Agent of
the Masters” was likely to come because He had to—and, indeed, that He
might put in his appearance at any time—, what this writer had failed to
realize was that no Messenger-Adept was preparing nor was required to come in
order to deliver His “Message” or head-up the “New Effort” when this writer
himself already possessed and, indeed, had possessed since January 1949 what is
(and was even then, unknown to him) the very “Message” Shambhalha intended to be
the “marching orders” for this 1975-2000 Cycle! In 1977, what was
required was only this writer’s personal awakening to this decisive,
activating fact. To this, he finally “awoke” on September 25,
1977.
On that date, quickly, against the horizon of his brightening landscape,
and ten thousand times brighter itself, into his consciousness struck the
lightning flash! Penetrating, illuminating, incisive, the shock of its impact
instantly brought together, welding into one coherent whole, all his past
labors, present work and plans, and future goals, all the findings, discoveries,
projects and hopes of 30 years of endeavor consecrated to the Cause of H.P.
Blavatsky and her vindication. His response was one of instant and inerradicable
conviction, a conviction which has not wavered since, nor retreated one iota
under the hammer-blows of all that his natural skepticism, self-criticism, and
cold, dispassionate, intellectual scrutiny and examination (during 90 subsequent
days) have since been able to focus upon the thought itself, upon its ever
aspect and conceivable ramification. (This writer learned long ago that no
“flash of intuition” however moving or “spiritually elevating” it may seem at
first, and no inexplicable “hunch” or sudden non-rational conviction, ought ever
to be accepted or acted upon without being first subjected to the “acid test” of
thorough rational examination, until balanced against all obtainable known
facts—and found not wanting.)
Thus came for the first time an awakening, a comprehension, a total
recognition of what is and what is not this writer’s mission in life, a mission
for which indeed he, alone of billions born since May 8, 1891, was born into,
and for which he has prepared and qualified himself—as no one else outside
Shambhalha’s circle of Initiation has been, in our time—by reason of all that
has transpired in his life as the result of the taking of his “vows” of 1940 and
1947. It is not a mission to build up a cadre of students to serve as a
group-vehicle for an “Impulse” yet to be issued, felt and received from the
Brotherhood of Masters, but it is the task, the now-bounden duty, to
serve personally—or impersonally—as an individual v0ehicle for the purpose of
passing on to these and others to the world itself, the Message that embodies
the Key-Note of that New Impulse from Shambhalha, a Message which even now is in
his keeping and understanding. A MESSAGE HAVING BEEN ALREADY PREPARED,
DELIVERED, RECEIVED, PRESERVED AND PASSED-ON TO SERVE US GUIDANCE AND INCENTIVE
IN THE NEW CYCLE THAT IS HERE. And the “group-vehicle” which is to follow, if
true to its purpose, will be to serve, first of all, as the public means to
project to the world in general and to occult aspirants in particular, this
Message he alone has found and is to make known for one purpose only, the
service of Shambhalha and its Great and Holy Cause. (Thus, for this Cycle, the
1875-1877 sequence—in which the group-vehicle preceded the release of the
“Message” and of its beginning—appears to be reversed.)
This writer’s mission is not to organize people for the study of HPB’s
Teachings, but to disseminate a Message; and if that Message is accepted and
assimilated, those who receive it will themselves be drawn to those Teachings,
and they will establish local study-groups and join in organizing a world-wide
union of many schools for Blavatskyana along the lines that Message
itself inherently suggests. The Message is to stimulate the guide them—the many
or the few—to a new summit of endeavor in the Holy Cause to which HPB gave her
all to the last. And if they reach that summit in the years of this Cycle which
still lie ahead, then they may find there awaiting them on the heights One Who
will be truly an Adept, an Initiate-Messenger with an even greater MESSAGE to
guide them still higher up the Path towards summit-less, Everlasting
TRUTH.
NOW, THE MASTER-MESSAGE—BUT NO
MESSENGER!
“TRY—and first work upon the material you have and then we
will be the first to help you get further evidence.”—Mahatma Koot
Hoomi
(Concluding sentence, first letter of correspondence to
Sinnett).
“There is no difficulty that strong intellect cannot
surmount. For those who win onwards, there is reward past all
telling...”—H.P.B.
Yes, this writer has gotten a “Message from Shambhalha,” it
has been delivered, found and “deciphered.” And whether it be the only
Message that world will receive before 2075 A.D., prepared by and coming
substantially intact and complete from that sublime source, only time and future
developments will disclose. Needless to say, this writer is not in conscious
occult-communication with any Adept (and he never speculates as to with whom he
may be in “unconscious communication”!)—never has been, and never expects to be
in this life—so he cannot prophecy! But this Message, such as it is, shows
itself to have been meant to strike the Key-Note of the Cycle now in force; and
if Mankind is to be blest by the coming of an Initiate-Agent from Shambhalha in
this century, it is certain that this Message will be at the heart and center of
any greater one He brings.
This Message is a Master-Key, an “Open Sesame” to the hidden Past, to the
Present and the Future of Shambhalha’s Work in the Western World, in America
especially, where the next advanced races of mankind—the best hope for
Humanity’s Spiritual Destiny—are to emerge. Upon first scrutiny, it appears only
to have been fashioned for one purpose, viz., to unlock The Secret of the
Occult Identity and Status of “H.P. Blavatsky.” But, as that, it also
is the Key to her life, Key to her Mission, Key to the provenance, the why and
wherefrom of her Message and all her works—hence, also, given “seven turns,” it
is the Master-Key to the future Right Path of action and occult endeavor to take
us where we are going in this New Cycle if we mean to follow upon the One Path
she showed. It is as well the Master-Key for perplexing and shutting
out—as never before—the sham teacher (and teachings) who have donned the
stolen mantle of Theosophy to pompously parade in the shadows cast by the True
Light!
Devotees of the occult, readers of Madame Blavatsky, Fellows of the T.S.
and their “Theosophical experts and authorities” (not forgetting every one of
them who has laid claim to hobnobbing with “Mahatmas” on “the astral planes”)
know no more of this Message than does the public-at-large; and when they see or
hear of it, the former are no more likely to accept it than the latter. How, it
will be asked, can there be any such Message when, in 1977, no Messenger, Agent
or Representative of the Trans-Himalayan Lodge of Masters has come forth,
neither before nor at the start of this Cycle? To be sure, as ever there have
been so-called psychic “visitations” by, and sham and diversionary
“communications”, from “Masters” and “Adepts” promising much—and delivering
nothing. But no Mahatma, Adept or Initiate on the White Path has put in an
appearance; and we know of no one who might remotely
qualify!
While this writer—and this writer first and only—has given historical
facts and reasons (but, as yet, not all) to explain this absence within
the context of formidable forces and fearful set-backs arrayed against the
Blessed Sons of Shambhalha since 1891 (see “‘The New Torch-Bearer of
Truth’—Why His Delay?”), only now is he also the first prepared to say
and to prove that while Time has nullified the prophecy of the
coming of this expected Messenger, Time too has vindicated the promise
that Shambhalha would provide for the world of 1975-2000 a “new” Message, a new
measure of “occult lore,” of occult-oriented truth and
enlightenment.
How, it has to be asked, can one who is no Mahatma, no Initiate or Adept,
nor consciously any Agent, Representative, Messenger or even Chela of a Master
or Mahatma—indeed, one who has not communication with anyone of the Great
Brotherhood, nor can testify to ever having seen and recognized any one of its
Members—presume to declare he has received and is to make known to all this
rarest of Messages from Shambhalha’s Brotherhood of Arhats? Remarkably, this is
how it has come about. Against such obstructive eventualities as have transpired
during these last eighty-six years, this Message was, in fact, prepared by
Madame Blavatsky and her Adept-Brothers prior to the close of her Mission in
1891; and by them it was hidden and preserved (indeed, in important part, saved
almost miraculously from intended destruction as ordered by Their “opposite
numbers”!). And though privately accessible to the early post-Blavatsky
leadership of the movement, the whole of it existing in print (now for 50 years
and more) has escaped the curiosity and even defied the perspicacity of
generations of Theosophists, historians, researchers and experts of all kinds!
Its discover and its public revelation had to await the proper time and the
proper discoverer, the one who would put it ONLY to the sole and proper purpose
for which it was originally intended! This “proper time” is now, for
this “secret Message” was fashioned to serve as the Key-Stone and the chief
impetus for the “New Effort of Enlightenment” in the Occult Cycle that only now
is unfolding under the returning of “Shambhalha’s
Impulse”!
Those who were able to foresee, a half-century and more
beforehand, the invasion and destruction of Tibet with the loss of Their own
Shigatse sanctuary and of Their Patron-Protector, the Tashi Lama, Panchen
Rimpoche, were certainly capable also of foreseeing the probability or even the
certainty that They would not—for a variety of inescapable reasons now
historically established—send in 1975 a Mahatma or an Initiate-Agent into the
Western World (or indeed, anywhere) to head-up the New Effort of the new Cycle.
Thus, against this foreseeable difficulty—a difficulty dictated not by Their own
will or inaction, but by the Black Karma of a collective Humanity
(illustrated in that of the Tibetan people), and especially that of some who
have been most forward in waving the banners of “Theosophy” and “Esoteric
Buddhism” while working daily, secretly when not openly, in deadly opposition to
the Primordial Wisdom of Sakyamuni—, the Chohans of Shambhalha saw to it that
the Message for our Cycle of time, the only Message this age merits, deserves
and needs, would, nevertheless and despite all, be delivered in such a way
that no Initiate in our day need cross the threshold of Their Dzyan Dzong to
deliver it.
Trusting to no delivery by “psychic transmission”—with all its vagaries,
deceptions and possibilities of dangerous exploitations, conscious or
unconscious (and, indeed, has not the world had enough of post-Blavatsky
“letters from the Masters”?!)—, this Message, fragmented and scattered like
pieces of an enigmatic puzzle (escaping all eyes closest to it), hidden here and
there throughout the writings and letters of Madame Blavatsky and her
Brothers-Adepts, needed only to be put altogether and then to be read in the
light of the Occult Philosophy, Science, and Ethics she taught, and afterwards
to be correlated with known history. That in good and proper time, as “the Cycle
moveth,” this Occult “Puzzle” would indeed be discovered, consolidated and
rightly read, its creators certainly knew! And that a “puzzle-master”, a
vindicator, would come at the proper time to make it known as
Shambhalha’s Message for the 1975 Cycle, They also must surely have
foreseen! Let no one any longer doubt the occult foresight, ingenuity or
boundless Will of the Great Ones of The White Path in their superhuman
determination to break down every impediment, to penetrate all barriers of time
and space in order to fulfill Their Compassionate Duty to “the Great Orphan,
Humanity” and to bring before it all the Spiritual Wisdom it collectively needs
and may, perchance, individually merit! So it ever will be with the Arhat-Sons
of the Thrice-Blessed Sakyamuni and Their Great Chief—that whatever gift of
Occult Knowledge may be needed, and can be assimilated to be put to the
highest Spiritual purpose, it will be given by Them in due time as They have
promised!
The work for the defence and vindication of Madame Blavatsky carries with
it far, far greater rewards than ever imagined in the fervid dreams of those
who, while meditating on “masters,: refuse to answer that most urgent command
the real Masters gave—: defend and vindicate her! “Why,” the sluggards have
always asked—vigorous as they are only in the defence of their own puerile
claims to occult lineage, and in the energetic manufacture of new and strange
“corrected” teachings, presented as “new installments” of “higher
esotericism”—“why should we interrupt the profound contemplation of our own
navels to refute before the karmically unready multitude an avalanche of
accusation we ourselves are satisfied are false?—What would it profit our
societies or ourselves to exhaust our time and money on projects to defend a
woman as long dead as her principal accusers—even though she, like our own
esteemed predecessors who succeeded her in authority, was a chela of our Masters
and the Masters’ chief amanuensis in her time?—Why concentrate on this petty,
disagreeable undertaking when we ought to be busy pleasing these very Masters by
propagating the sale of our books and teachings, second-to-none, esoteric wisdom
received firsthand from the Mahatmas since the death of HPB, by chelas even
higher than her and teachings more advanced than hers!—?”
What these complacent nay-sayers and slackers in the sin of their
selfishness and the fog of their self-delusion have not known is that in
defending and vindicating Mme Blavatsky—and in marshaling all the facts
available to that one purpose, so as to discover and proclaim all the truth
about her—, one could come into possession and understanding of Shambhalha’s
Hidden Message, the greatest gift of all to the post-Blavatsky world, a
veritable Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, planted 86 years and more ago,
waiting to shower its Fruit of Wisdom upon all aspirants to Truth in the
1975-2000 Cycle! But for these “who have gone out another way,” they shall
indeed receive their reward, as one of the Mahatmas said of their kind—“the
reward of their selfishness”—, for it was never Truth they wanted, nor were they
capable of digesting the Fruit of Wisdom this Message
bears!
THE ONLY “MESSAGE FROM THE MASTERS” MERITED OR NEEDED—A
“HISTORY LESSON” IN (AS H.P.B. FORESAW THE “FUTURE NEED”) “CLEAR
JUDGMENT”
The Message of H.P. Blavatsky was fourfold: Primordial Buddhism, The
Living Ancient Wisdom, expressed in terms of: (i) Philosophy, (ii) Science,
(iii) Ethics, and (iv) History. The fourth of these has been the least
appreciated and the most overlooked, in general totally neglected as a study.
And yet, without a solid historical base in factual events on this globe,
without experiential reality in the life of the Human Race—without individual or
group “carriers” and their “footprints on the sands of time,” their beginnings,
landmarks, triumphs, vicissitudes and defeats along the way, up to and including
the span of HPB’s Mission, and right down to this very day—, the Philosophy, the
Science and the Ethics which constitute Occultism (if these could then be said
to exist at all, without objective experience) would be no better than myth.
There has been an almost universal failure to see that, from first to last,
Madame Blavatsky sought always to disclose and trace back, step-by-step thru
clues and facts of known history (by citing a myriad of authorities whom
scholars could respect), the moral, spiritual and intellectual roots and runners
of the Wisdom-Religion and its arch-Bearers, as are to be found imbedded in the
annals of historical record ancient and modern.
This was a most extraordinary departure from the common mode of so-called
occult teaching, a style of factual presentation formerly attempted only by
antiquarians and anthropologically-oriented chroniclers of occult curiosities
and superstitious customs. And it is equally noteworthy that those pretenders
who have followed after, with claims to be walking in her footsteps, have
ignored this means of getting at truth, being content to luxuriate in
philosophical speculation, applying their tortured creativity to putting forth
fancied doctrines as new revelations of Occult Science and Ethics, adorned only
with as little history as their imaginations could comprehend or invent in order
to color boldly their own pseudo-occult claims. The disastrous result has a
wholesale tampering by these usurpers with the Philosophy, Science and Ethics of
Real Occultism as left behind by HPB and her Mahatma
helpers.
One reason for this intellectual, moral and spiritual debauchery is that
it was been universally supposed that the Messenger to follow would come
bringing a “new installment” of like teachings “from the Lodge of Masters,” the
next “higher level” of “esoteric” lessons to be learned, a “further development”
or “extension” (including “corrections”!) of Esoteric Philosophy or Occult
Science. In pretending to fulfill this feverish expectation—despite HPB’s
explicit warning that after hers, there would be no authentic Message of any
kind sent out from Shambhalha to the world (to Europe and America in particular)
before 1975, a date the pretenders, being themselves mortal, knew well
they could not await—, the post-Blavatsky crop of self-nominated
“messengers, agents and amanueses of the Masters” during the last 86 years has
run amok in a mad desire to satisfy their own vanity and the cupidity of their
“theosophical” audiences, showering the world with ever new and ever more
fantastic concoctions of philosophy, “esoteric science” and “occult ethics”
bolstered by bombastic claims and revelations, all of which have proven to be
on essential points utterly alien and directly contrary to the original
Blavatskyana.
What these imposters one-and-all never guessed was that the level of
wisdom already provided and intended by the Chohans of Shambhalha to be the one
true and only “next installment,” one prepared and fitted to this present
generation and for the New Cycle now underway—a Cycle that is to provide the
Brotherhood of Arhats its only opportunity to set the course of Occultism in the
Occident (at least) for fully a century beyond 1975—, was to be (and is)
something quite different than the expected, a Message that is rooted in
and springing from history particularly the course of history which runs
back 146 years to 1831 and beyond to the earliest physical beginnings of
preparation for the last Mission from the World-Center of Occult Truth (a
Mission that was far, far more important—to the past preceded it, to the
present, and to the future—than ever has been guessed!). The understanding and
wisdom today needed by worthy aspirants to Occult Truth and Wisdom—a needed best
seen as it is mirrored in the post-Blavatsky events of the history of the
movement founded under her inspiration—can best and only fully be provided by
the lessons to be drawn through a close and conscientious, honest study of ever
revelant event and aspect of this past with its available records. It is said
that those who ignore History, “never learn” and will themselves suffer the same
self-begotten disasters that befell their forefathers. So it is that the lessons
we have to learn in this New Cycle of Occult Enlightenment—to save the open
course of Real Esotericism within our world of this century and the next—must be
seen and assimilated and converted into a guide to action only in the light cast
upon them which comes from the Message this Cycle has been
given.
This task is not something that can be approached by anyone beholden to
organized Theosophy or to any one of its centers; nor can it be undertaken for
the contrived purpose of aggrandizing some “successor to HPB” or someone living,
neither some “line of succession.” It must be an over-view of events such as can
be seen only by one dedicated solely to the defence and vindication of HPB and
her Adept-Brothers and their 1875-1891 Teachings. For 37 years, as a skeptic and
outsider, this writer has been engaged, yes, extraordinarily engrossed, in the
personal pursuit of this study—for a longer period of continuous research of
such nature than anyone heretofore has undertaken; and for 30 years he has been
recognized as the most tireless digger (and, in his time, the only one
free of entangling affiliation) in mining the hidden facts of this history and
in bringing them to public notice (or formerly, at least those which have
generally gone under the term, “the Defence of Madame Blavatsky”). And now, with
developments of 1974-1977—especially the discoveries of 1977—added to and
interlocking with the grand “Secret to the Mystery of ‘HPB’” herself (ultimate
knowledge of “her” occult identity, status and Mission, which came into his
possession and understanding as far back as early 1949, though not publicly
disclosed, leaving him to wonder for decades whatever might be done with such
stupendous information!), the true scope and value of the work commanding this
writer’s duty can now at last be fully understood and openly
delineated.
This is nothing more nor anything less than a complete and comprehensive
historical vindication of “HPB,” not only of her career (and the defence of her
phenomena, which has been and is still to be an essential part of it), but also
of her occult status, of her past, present and future place in the history and
development of Western Occultism—all of the utmost relevance to ourselves and to
those who are to follow after us. This work ahead neither promises nor requires
any “extension” or supplementation of the Philosophy she brought (indeed,
the Occult Truths she delivered may well serve Mankind into the 24th
Century A.D. or beyond as the epitome of Occult Wisdom); the world and its
occult communities neither needing nor meriting the receipt of deeper lessons
than those she taught in Occult Science (Practical Magick); and as for
Ethics, hers are not to be excelled in this or any
century!
In the midst of her most lengthy, deepest discussion of the forthcoming
20th Century “Effort” and what would bear upon it, and when speaking
of “Theosophy in the future” and, more especially, concerning prospects of the
public means already underway for its propagation, Madame Blavatsky in The
Key to Theosophy foresaw that this “future” would “depend almost entirely
upon the degree of selflessness, earnestness, devotion, and last, but not least,
on the amount of knowledge and wisdom possessed by those... on whom it will fall
to carry on the work... after the death of the Founders.” Asked “how this
knowledge can be as vital a factor in the question as these other qualities,”
since “Surely the literature which already exists, and to which constant
additions are still being made, ought to be sufficient,” HPB remonstrated: “I do
not refer to technical knowledge of esoteric doctrine, though that is most
important; I speak rather of the great need which our successors... will have of
unbiased and clear judgment” (Op. cit., pp. 304-05).
Accordingly, the Message of our New Cycle, as left to our finding by the
Message-Bearers of Shambhalha, is NOT like that “which already exists” and
“ought to be sufficient” (especially after being supplemented by The Voice of
the Silence and HPB’s later writings, with the Mahatma Letters
publicly added long afterwards!), viz., “technical knowledge of the
esoteric doctrine,” but it is a Message even then secretly in process of
preparation for delivery) provided for the sole purpose of answering what Mme
Blavatsky herself here calls “the great need”—and oh, how “great” the
spiritual hell of the post-Blavatsky dark years has indeed proven that “need” to
be!—, the necessity for “unbiased and clear judgment.” And it is only by
taking to heart the timeless and tragic lessons of past history that one
can—without falling into the same bogs and snare-pits which entrapped our
unfortunate predecessors—develop (if at all) the kind of “unbiased and clear
judgment” which alone can save ourselves and our work for the Cause to which we
are dedicated. Only thus can we avoid repeating the fatal errors of the defeated
past and insure that the Spiritual Potentially of this Cycle will not be
exhausted in ruin and its aspirants not join the failures that lie
everywhere along the Path of Occultism, beset as it is with dangers of all
kinds. To profit from these common-sense “lessons of history,” history
open and history occult, to unlock the truths imprisoned beneath the facade of
historical “mysteries,” truths essential to the development of our own Spiritual
Discernment and Rational Discrimination, one must have a Master-Key. The
Master-Key to the origin, course and development of Occultism in the Occident is
nothing else but Shambhalha’s Messsage left by the 1875 “Effort” to our finding
for that of 1975. It will prove to be “the stone which the builders rejected”—to
those of the past, “a stumbling block and a rock of offense”; but for those who
will build a new edifice on the ruins of the old, it will become “the chief
corner-stone” and “will dash to pieces all who fall upon
it.”
“AGAINST INSUPERABLE ODDS”—OF CHANCE:
1-in-33,701
(November 17, 1923—September 29, 1877—August 12,
1831)
1-in-52,685
(November 8, 1975—August 12, 1831)
1-in-38,799
(September 25, 1977—August 14, 1924—July 4,
1871)
In 1975 a rare and significant Astrological Cycle culminated on the
8th of November, just seven days before the Centenary Celebration of
The Theosophical Society and Movement opened in New York City. The planet Pluto,
slowest-circling and most remote of the Sun’s planetary satellites, is for
Astrologers the indicator par excellence of “the outer reaches,” of
“pioneers” and “pioneer explorers of the Unknown” (in her book, The
Theosophical Glossary, p. 214, Mme Blavatsky uses the term “pioneer” in
speaking of “the Great Brotherhood” and “their usual pioneer, sent in the last
quarter of every century to enlighten a small part of the western nations in
occult lore.”).
On November 8th, 1975, for the first time in 300 years or
more, Pluto in its circling of the Zodiac traversed the 28th minute
of the 11th degree of longitude of the Ecliptical Sign of the
Balances, Libra. One hundred-and-fourty-four years, two months, and 27 days
previous to that date, Pluto had been in the exact opposition-point,
10°28' of the sign Aries, the Sacrificial Ram. For Pluto, this
constitutes an exceedingly rare transit of exactly 180° (one half-circle) of the
Zodiac, and it was also the only astronomical “complementary” phenomenon to mark
the time of this Centenary. During the span of the time passed between these
positions, the plant had moved 10,800 minutes of longitude, so that the
odds of finding by random chance alone any significant relationship between
events corresponding to these two far-separated dates of astronomically
complementary position are 10,800-to-1 (or if we calculate on an
astronomical timescale, by counting the intervening daily revolutions of the
Earth itself, the odds are 52,685-to-1 in days).
Nevertheless, when Pluto stood at 10°28'
of Aries, the date was August 12, 1831, the day of birth for Helen
Petrovna von Hahn. At the opposite end of this extraordinary Zodiacal
half-circle, the only event occurring November 8, 1975, and known to relate to
H.P.B. and to her Mission, was this writer’s completion and final typing of his
manuscript, “To the Theosophical Movement on the Eve of Its Centenary: Some
Words of ‘Warning’”—then readying for the printer what was, then unknown to its
author himself, the “first occult shot” opening the 1975-2000 Cycle. (The
typescript was dispatched by Greyhound Express, received, retyped and a Forward
added and signed on November 10th by the publisher, the President of
The Blavatsky Foundation; see Theosophical Notes, Nov. 5, 1975; pp. 15
and 1.)
The midpoint (at 5,400 minutes) of this
10,800-minute-of-longitude journey of Pluto was reached during the years 1922-24
when on five different occasions (four after apparent “retrogradation”), the
planet passed through 10°28'
of the sign Cancer, 90° from the 1831 and 1975 positions. The last two of these
passes occurred in 1924 when this writer was “gestating”. And he was born 110
days after the last of these “transits.” In fact, he was born as soon thereafter
as one of the “Benefics” (Venus) first moved into the tenth degree of Cancer,
(His natal Venus, Ruler of the birthchart Ascendant, is thus 90° from the Moon
in HPB’s nativity—this natal moon in Libra being almost exactly opposite to her
Pluto as noted—and midway between her Moon in the tenth degree of Libra and her
Pluto itself. Also, at this writer’s birth the position of Jupiter, “the Great
Benefic,” was in the 10th degree of Sagittarius, 90° from HPB’s
Mercury in the 10th degree of the sign Virgo. The Moon, of course,
denotes “the public,” while Mercury “rules writing, teaching,
messages”).
As Madame Blavatsky states in The Theosophical
Glossary (a book expert on plagiarism, Mr. De Zirkoff, in her Collected
Writings, has decided to suppress), Shambhalha’s 18th Century
“Effort” was directly “supervised” by the Comte de St. Germain. Now while it is
unlikely any non-Initiate today—except perhaps this writer—can say just
what St. Germain’s Mission was (though the date of his reported death
verifies it), the illustrious Count, having retired from known public and
private activity, “died” in the year 1784. The Seventh (1x7) Septenary
Cycle, counted from the year 1784, began in 1826 and ended in 1833, during which
cycle in 1831 the next Messenger was born. The Fourteenth (2x7) Septenary
Cycle from 1784 began in 1875, the year the Theosophical Society itself was
founded and the modern Theosophical Movement was born. The Twenty-First
(3x7) Septenary Cycle of this series ended in 1931, centennial of HPB’s
birth, after beginning early in 1924, the year of this writer’s birth.
This date of birth was August 14, 1924 (the 14th being 12 days
after the birthday of Colonel H.S. Olcott on the 2nd, and 2 days
after that of HPB herself on the 12th). Counting 19,399 days
forward from that date brings us to September 25, 1977, when this
writer was first “awakened” to the fact that he was in full possession and
understanding of the Key-Note Message the Chohans of Shambhalha had provided for
the 1975-2000 Cycle in event no Initiate-Messenger could be sent to
fulfill HPB’s long-watched “prophecy.” Counting backwards the same number
of days, 19,399. goes to July 4, 1871, when the S.S. Eunomia exploded in
the Aegean Straits and—as this writer will duly show—Mme Blavatsky’s
conscious execution of her Great Mission began.
Since the death of Madame Blavatsky, the most significant event in the
history of World-Occultism took place in December 1923, with the first
publication of The Mahatma Letters to A.P. Sinnett from the Mahatmas M. and
K.H.. In the very month prior thereto, the physical conception of
this writer occurred, he being born exactly nine months later than the
average time of human gestation is not “nine months” but 266 days. The
17th of November, 1923, was the first day of the Seventh year of the
Seventh Septenary Cycle of the founding of The Theosophical Society itself, the
start of the 49th year of the modern Movement owing its initial
inspiration to H.P. Blavatsky. Counting back from this date (November 17,
1923)—which may be taken as the true time of beginning of this writer’s
mortal existence—to the date of the “birth” of Isis Unveiled, September
29, 1877, and the beginning of HPB’s manifest work as Shambhalha’s World-Teacher
for the “Aquarian Age,” one calculates 16,850 days. Counting back from
September 29, 1877 another 16,850 days (or a total of 33,701 days
in which the midpoint is the “birthdate” of Isis Unveiled), carries us
to August 12, 1831, the day when the infant Helena von Hahn first opened her
mortal eyes!
Oh, that she could see the tribute now laid at her feet! Paltry as it is
against what it might have been—lowly, humble, infinitesimal as it surely is
beside all she gave to us!—, still, tribute it is, and the
worthiest we can bring.
What more shall we together—The Blavatsky Foundation and its
faithful co-workers of today and tomorrow in her Holy Cause—add to it in all the
days of promise yet to come?
In the midst of war,
Peace!
Walter A. Carrithers,
Jr.
Christmas Night,
1977
(Condensed, re-checked and
corrected,
January 8, 1978, 9:22
p.m.
Typing completed, January 23, 3:12
p.m.)