THEOSOPHYANDNEWTHOUGHT

2

THEOSOPHYANDNEWTHOUGHTBy

HENRYC.SHELDONPROFESSORINBOSTONUNIVERSITY

NewYorkTHEABINGDONPRESS

©1916/2018

LutheranLibrary.org

3

CopyrightInformation

Copyright©2018byTheLutheranLibraryPublishingMinistryLutheranLibrary.org

Allrightsreserved.

Whiletheoriginaltextisinthepublicdomain,theformattingandcontentsofthisvolumeareundercopyright.

Pleaserespectthelaborthathasgoneintotherestorationofthiswork.

Originallypublished1916byTheAbingdonPress,NewYorkandCincinnati.

Unabridged.

236–v3r1

4

Contents

CopyrightInformation

Contents

Preface

PartI–Theosophy

Chapter1.HistoricalOutlines

Chapter2.AppraisalOfTheosophyByTheosophists

Chapter3.TheAttitudeAssumedTowardCompetingFaiths

Chapter4.TheBasisOfAuthority

Chapter5.TheDoctrineOfGod

Chapter6.CosmologicalTheories

Chapter7.ConceptionsOfManAndHisDestiny

Chapter8.TheTheosophicPrincipleOfAuthorityTested

1.MadameBlavatskyfalsifiedherHistorywithSpiritualism

2.MadameBlavatskyPlayedtheRoleofaCharlatanandTrickster.

3.TheosophyWasDrawnFromModernWritings,nottheMahatmas.

4.Tibetnotevidenceofexceptionallyendowedinstructors

5.WherearetheBenefitsoftheSupposedMahatmas?

6.SkepticismofTheosophists

Chapter9.CommentsOnProminentFeaturesOfTheTheosophicalSystem

5

PartII–NewThought

Chapter1.GeneralSketch

Chapter2.TheDoctrineOfMan

Chapter3.TheConceptionOfGodAndOfMan’sRelationToHim

Chapter4.TheTherapeuticScheme

Chapter5.SomeGroundsOfCriticism

AbouttheLutheranLibraryPublishingMinistry

SomeAuthorsForYouToDiscover

GreatNarratives

Topics

HowCanOneFindPeaceWithGod?

IfYouFindTypographicErrors

WanttobenotifiedofFutureReleases?

CatalogofTitles

“Extras”

TheLutheranLibrary

Benediction

6

Preface

The double title given to the book is not meant to imply thatTheosophy and New Thought are approximately identical. Theinclusionofthetwoinasinglevolumeisratheramatterofconveniencethanoflogical classification. We recognize that, while they have distinct points ofsimilarity, they also exhibit quite apparent contrasts in spirit and content. Inparticular the intemperate speculation and headlongOrientalismofTheosophyare but partially reflected in New Thought. Both, however, make very highclaims,andthisfactjustifiesthesubjectingofthemtoclosescrutiny.

7

PartI–Theosophy

8

Chapter1.HistoricalOutlines

The type of Theosophy which is here examined is of very recentdate.Whatevermaybe theageof someof its ingredients, it firstbegan tobecompounded in 1875. In the fall of that year the Theosophical Society wasstarted in New York city. The most efficient agent in its origination was aRussian woman whose maiden name was Helena Petrovna Hahn, but who –from thenameofN.B.Blavatsky,her first andonly legalhusbandwhomsheleft after a three months’ trial – is known as Madame Blavatsky. Closelyassociatedwithher,andherconstantcoadjutortillherdeath,wasH.S.Olcott,commonlymentionedbythetitleofColonel,whichhegainedintheCivilWar.W. Q. Judge, who, after Olcott, became one of the most conspicuous amongAmerican representatives of Theosophy, was also connected with the Societyfromthefirst.

TheearlierlifeofMadameBlavatskyliespartlyinthemist.Theascertainedfacts are that she was married in 1848, at the age of seventeen; that afterdeserting her husband she led a wandering life for twenty-five years, beingfound at intervals in Paris, London, Russia,Greece, Egypt, theUnited States,Mexico, and India. For at least a considerable part of this period she wasinterested inoccultism, and it is probable that inherEastern travels she cameintosufficientcontactwithprofessionalmagicianstolearnsomewhatoftheirart.From the testimony of members of her own family it is known that even inchildhoodshewascharacterizedbypeculiarpsychicgifts,orabilities tofigureas a “medium,” and there is clear evidence that as early as 1858 she becamedistinctlyaffiliatedwithSpiritualism.1Thirteenyearslater(1871)sheattemptedtofound“asortofspiritualsocietyatCairo,uponabasisofphenomena.”Thisproved to be a “lamentable fiasco,”2 but her interest in Spiritualism was notdampenedbythemiserableoutcome,andonherarrivalatNewYorkin1873shesoughtcooperationwiththemediumswhosereputedmarvelsat that timewereattractingmuchattention.Theconnectionwasbrief,sinceexposureoffraudulentproceedingsgreatlyabridgedpublicinterestinspiritualisticperformances.Itwasthought best to try a new scheme. And so resort was made to Theosophy as

9

beingatoncelessexposedtohostilejudgment,andfurnishingabundantmeansfor gratifying an appetite for occultism. The result was the founding of theTheosophicalSociety.Aswasobserved,thistookplaceinthefallof1875.

ForthenexttwoyearsMadameBlavatsky’senergiesweremainlydevotedtothewritingofthefirstnotablemanifestoofmodernTheosophy,theworkintwoponderousvolumesentitledIsisUnveiled.Nearthecloseof1878shewentwithOlcott to India. Here an appreciable success was won. The attempt toamalgamatetheTheosophicalSocietywiththeAryaSamajmiscarried,itistrue,but the flattering tributes paid toHindu philosophy and religion, aided by theimpressionmadebythereputedmarvels,especiallyattheheadquartersinAdyar,securedtheadhesionofaconsiderablenumberofthenatives,asalsoofseveralEuropean residents.Acheck toproselytism3 occurred in1884-85by reasonofthepublication,firstintheMadrasChristianCollegeMagazineandthenintheProceedingsoftheSocietyforPsychicalResearch,ofevidencesoffraudinthealleged marvels at Adyar. The evidences were overwhelming; but theTheosophicalleadersmetthemwithdenialsandcontinuedtolaborenergeticallyfor their scheme. Madame Blavatsky began, under the title of “The SecretDoctrine,” the work which largely occupied her later years, and which iscommonly ranked as the magnum opus of modern Theosophy. It is her mostelaborate contribution to the literature of her school, though in point ofserviceableintroductiontohermaturedtheoriesherKeytoTheosophymightbegiven precedence. The death of Madame Blavatsky occurred in 1891. Anestimateofhercharacterwillhardlybeavoidablewhenwecometoconsiderthegrounds of authority claimed for the Theosophical system. In the presentconnection itwill suffice to repeat the characterizationgivenbyonewhowascontinuouslyinhercompanyfor thelargerpartofhercareerasaTheosophist,andwhoclaimedtohaverevised,as toform,nearlyeverypageofherEnglishwritings.“If thereeverexistedaperson inhistory,”writesOlcott, “whowasagreater conglomeration of good and bad, light and shadow, wisdom andindiscretion, spiritual insight and lack of common sense, I cannot recall thename,thecircumstances,ortheepoch.”4

At the time when the exposure made by the report of the Society forPsychical Research cast a cloud over the prospects of the Theosophicalmovement,itwoninthepersonofMrs.AnnieBesantanadherentwhosegiftaspublic speaker and as writer was to serve as an important asset. Some yearsearlierthiswomanhadlefthome,husband,andinfant,joinedtheFreeThoughtSociety in London, and become an intense advocate of an atheistic and

10

socialistic platform. By an apparently sudden turn she exchanged her rankskepticismforthecomplexaffirmationsofTheosophy.

Shortly after the death of Madame Blavatsky a schism occurred in theTheosophicalSociety.UptothattimeOlcotthadservedaspresidentandW.Q.Judgeasvice-president.TheconvictionnowenteredthemindofJudgethatthefirst placewas due to him.Accordingly, hewent diligently towork, resortingamongotherexpedients to letters inhis interestwhichpurportedtocomefromtheMahatmaswhoweresupposedtousetheSocietyasthechosenmouthpieceoftheirsuperiorwisdom.Olcottwassufficientlyoverawedtoresign.ButhewasinpossessionofverycogentevidencethatJudgehimselfwastheauthoroftheMahatma letters which favored his promotion. In the issue he withdrew hisresignation and found opportunity to convince Mrs. Besant that Judge hadplayedfalse.However,anattemptwasmadetoavoidscandalandtohushupthematter.Thiswasnotwhollysuccessful,andtheresultwasthatJudgebrokeawayfromthepartyofOlcottandBesant,takingwithhimamajorityoftheAmericanTheosophists.Afterhisdeathin1896Mrs.KatherineTingleywasinvestedwiththe presidency of the American branch, with Point Loma, California, as theheadquarters. On the death of Olcott in 1907 Mrs. Besant took his place aspresident.Theschismremainedunhealed,andgoestoshowthatthetreasureofTheosophywascommittedtoearthenvessels.ThatthemembersoftheSocietywerequiteaccessibletomundanemotivesandtemperswasprovedatanearlierpoint; for Madame Blavatsky in her day admitted that there was as muchbackbiting, slandering, and quarreling in the Theosophical Society, as in theChristianchurches,letalonescientificsocieties.5

Among those who supported the Theosophical movement in India aprominentplacewastakenbyA.P.Sinnett,andhiswritingsmakeaconsiderablefactorintheliteratureofthemovement.AlatercontributortothatliteratureisC.W. Leadbeater, in recent years closely associated with Mrs. Besant at theheadquartersinMadras,thoughforaperiod(1905-1909)hewasconstrainedtodisconnecthimselffromtheSocietyonthescoreofthechargeofdisseminatingimmoral teaching among boys. A defense of this teaching by an AmericanTheosophist,VanHoek,was sharply challenged inEngland.On the refusal oftheGeneralCounciltowithdrawthisdocument“abodyofsevenhundredBritishTheosophists, including nearly all the cultured and influentialmembers in thecountry,andanumberinotherlands,lefttheSociety.”6

11

1. LetterofMadameBlavatskycitedbyOlcottinTheTheosophist,August,1892.↩

2. Olcott,OldDiaryLeaves,pp.22,23.↩3. Ed:orig.‘propagandism’↩4. Olcott,OldDiaryLeaves,Foreword,p.vii.↩5. KeytoTheosophy,pp.250-252.↩6. J.N.Farquhar,ModernReligiousMovementsinIndia,pp.273,274.↩

12

Chapter2.AppraisalOfTheosophyByTheosophists

The terms inwhich the leadingexponentsofTheosophyextol theirreligio-philosophicalschemeviewiththeemphaticlanguageinwhichMaryBakerG.Eddydescribedherreligio-medicaldispensation.

Inonerespectarelativemodestycharacterizestheclaimsoftheformerparty.Theyrenouncethehonoroforiginality,asalsoofdirectdivineinspiration.Theirteaching, they say, is identicalwithaprimitiveWisdom-Religion, and thishasbeen in theworld foran immenseperiod,havingbeenhandedonbya lineofhighly perfected men, variously designated as Mahatmas, Adepts, Initiates,Masters,and theWhiteBrotherhood.Butwhile theyarecontent toassumetheroleoftransmitters,theyenormouslymagnifytheirvocation,inthattheyclaimto possess truth in all its depth and amplitude.Let a few statements illustrate.“Modernscience,”saysMadameBlavatsky,“isancientthoughtdistortedandnomore.”1 “The secret doctrine of the East contains the Alpha and Omega ofuniversal science.”2 “Our work is a plea for the recognition of the Hermeticphilosophy,theancientlyuniversalWisdom-Religion,astheonlypossiblekeytotheAbsolute in science and theology.”3 “TheWisdom-Religion was ever oneand the same, and being the last word of possible human knowledge wastherefore carefully preserved. It preceded by long ages the AlexandrianTheosophists, reached the modern, and will survive every other religion andphilosophy.”4

“Religion,”writesOlcott,“hasbutonefoundation–Theosophy.”5“Modernmetaphysics,”observesSinnett,“andtoalargeextentmodernphysicalscience,have been groping for centuries blindly after knowledge which occultphilosophy has enjoyed in full measure all the while.”6 “Theosophy is theessence of religion and of all religions worthy of the name.”7 “Theosophy,”assertsJudge,“isthatoceanofknowledgewhichspreadsfromshoretoshoreofthe evolution of sentient beings. . . . Embracing both the scientific and thereligious,Theosophy isa scientific religionanda religiousscience.”8 In short,the whole round of important truth, metaphysical, religious, and scientific, isclaimedforTheosophy.It isdescribedastheonesourceofadequateguidance,

13

and,accordingtoMadameBlavatsky,itsilluminatingraysdidnotbreakthroughthefogofhumansystemsanytoosoon.“HadtheformationoftheTheosophicalSociety,” she affirms, “been postponed a few years longer, one half of thecivilizednationswouldhavebecomebythistimerankmaterialists,andtheotherhalfanthropomorphistsandphenomenalists.”9

1. TheSecretDoctrine,I.579.↩2. Ibid.,III.22.↩3. IsisUnveiled,Preface.↩4. KeytoTheosophy,p.9.↩5. Theosophy,Religion,andOccultScience,p.39.↩6. TheOccultWorld,p.1.↩7. TheGrowthoftheSoul,p.42.↩8. TheOceanofTheosophy,p.1.↩9. KeytoTheosophy,p.36.↩

14

Chapter3.TheAttitudeAssumedTowardCompetingFaiths

TheplacingofTheosophyuponsuchaloftyplaneandtheassignmenttoitofsuchawideprovincewerenaturallyaccompaniedbydisparagingreferencesto rival systems. In this adverse judgment the Spiritualismwithwhich it washistoricallyconnected,andoutofwhichinasenseitemerged,wasnotspared.

Madame Blavatsky took pains in her first work to speak of it in slightingterms.Shedeclaredthatthematerializedformsproducedinseanceswerenottheactual forms of the persons with whom communication was supposed to bemade,“butrather, theirportraitstatues,constructed,animated,andoperatedbytheelementaries.”1Shestated,further,thatthepassivitywhichisaconditionofeffective mediumship is a source of exposure to foreign and deleteriousinfluences, as ismade plain by the notorious fact thatmediums are generallyeithersicklyor,what isworse, inclined tosomeabnormalvice.2 InherKey toTheosophyshetaughtthatthespiritsofthedeadcannotreturntoearthexceptinrarecases,and thatmaterializationsandsuch likephenomenaareproducedbytheastraldoubleofthemediumorofsomeonepresent,orbytheastralshellsofvanishedpersonalities,orbyelementals,neverbytheconsciousindividualityofthe disembodied.3 Further on in the same treatise she makes this statement:“Theosophists accept the phenomena of ‘materialization’ but reject the theorythat it is producedby ‘spirits’; that is, the immortal principlesofdisembodiedpersons.Theosophistshold thatwhen thephenomenaaregenuine–which isafactofrareroccurrencethanisgenerallybelieved–theyareproducedbylarvae,theeidolonsorkamalokic‘ghosts’ofthedeadpersonalities.”4Shealsorecordsthejudgmentthatmediumshipopensthedoorto“aswarmofspooksgood,bad,and indifferent.” “All this dealing with the dead is necromancy and a mostdangerous practice.”5 In line with these sharp criticisms, she sometimesspecified the putting down of Spiritualism as one of the main objects ofTheosophy.6SimilarestimatesofSpiritualismanditsphenomenamightbecitedfrom other writers. But not all exponents of Theosophy are given to quite soradicaladisparagement.ThusW.J.Colvillemakesroomforalegitimateorder

15

ofspiritualistictransactions.“Mediumship,”hesays,“hasoftenbeenanerraticmanifestation of spiritual power, but in its highest phases it is strictlytheosophical, though in its lowest it is nothingmore than ‘graymagic’”7 Thepointofviewcontainedinthesewordswouldseemtohavemadesomeprogressinrecentyears.WenotethatanEnglishobservermakesboldtostate,“ThereisnotalknowaboutputtingdownSpiritualism;infact,thetwocultsareatpresentcoquetting affectionately.”8 Whatever their differences and incompatibilities,they have a connecting bond in their common appetite for occult and strangephenomena.

The vitality of its interest in occultism serves also to give to Theosophy acertainassociationwithastrology,thoughtheformalattitudeassumedtowardthelatterbytheadvocatesoftheformerhasnotbeenuniform.MadameBlavatskywas distinctly appreciative. “It is now amply proved,” she wrote, “thathoroscopes and judiciary astrologyarenotquitebasedon fiction, and that thestarsandconstellations,consequently,haveanoccultandmysterious influenceon, and connection with, individuals. And if with the latter, why not withnations, races,andmankind inbulk?”9Againshe remarked:“Everystudentofoccultism knows that the heavenly bodies are closely related during eachManvantara with the mankind of that special cycle; and there are some whobelieve that each great character born during that period has as every othermortalhas–onlyinfarstrongerdegree–hisdestinyoutlinedwithinitsproperconstellationorstar.”10Thepositionof the founder,as thus indicated,wasnotfollowed by the whole body of Theosophists. “Themembers of the Society,”saysG.R.S.Mead,“takeupthemostdivergentandcontradictoryattitudeswithregard to astrology; somebelieve in itwith various qualifications, a few evenmake it a religion, as it were; some ridicule it as an absurd superstition, andproclaimtheastrologeracharlatan;themajorityareinclinedtothinktheremaybesomethinginit,butarecontenttoadmittheirignoranceoftheart,andwhatismore their indifference to it.”11Thewriterof this extractmaybepresumed tohave been well informed; but we surmise that it will be found difficult forTheosophistsasabody,withtheirbenttomagnifytheworthofthemysticalandmagicalschemeofantiquity,totakeupanattitudeofsheerindifferencetowardastrology.

Asrespectsthegreatreligions,Theosophyassertsabroadpropositionwhichmight seem to imply that they stand upon a substantial parity. It pronouncesthemall tobe identical in their esoteric content, howeverwidely theymaybecontrasted in theirexotericorpopularform.“Theosophy,”saysLeadbeater,“is

16

identicalwithesotericBuddhismandHinduism,but then so it iswith esotericZoroastrianism, esotericMohammedanism, andesotericChristianity.”12 In lessdirect terms the following words of Mrs. Besant emphasize the idea thatfundamentallythegreatreligionsareone:“WhetherthepersonpraytoBuddha,toVishnu,toChrist,totheFather,itmattersnotatall.”13

But notwithstanding this formal proposition on the underlying identity ofreligions, Theosophical writings contain not a little in the line of a relativedisparagementofChristianityandarelativeglorificationoftheleadingsystemsof the East, especially thosewhich have had their historic theater in India. Ingeneral, the champions of Theosophy speak of Christianmissionaries in verycontemptuous terms,andsomeof themgiveabundantevidencesofaveritablespite toward Christianity. This is emphatically true of Madame Blavatsky. Invariouswaysshegivesexpressiontoherappetiteforavirtualvilification.“TheIsraelitish Scriptures,” she says, “drew their hidden wisdom from the primalWisdom-ReligionthatwasthesourceoftheotherScriptures,onlyitwassadlydegradedbybeingappliedtothingsandmysteriesofthisearth,insteadofthosein the higher and ever present, though invisible, spheres.”14 She charges theBiblical religionwithwholesaleborrowing.“While thedoctrines,ethicalcode,and observances of the Christian religion were all appropriated fromBrahmanism and Buddhism, its ceremonies, vestments, and pageantry weretakenbodilyfromLamaism.”15Andmuchofthisborrowingwouldseemnottohavehadthemeritofbeingatfirsthand,forshetellsusinanotherconnection:

“The doctrines of the Gospels, and even of the Old Testament, have beentakenbodilyfromthebookofEnoch.ThewholeofthePentateuchwasadaptedto fit inwith the factsgiven.”16On thecharacterof thePentateuchshemakesthisenvenomedcomment:

“In itshiddenmeaning, fromGenesis to the lastwordofDeuteronomy, thePentateuch is the symbolical narrative of the sexes, and is an apotheosis ofPhallicism,underastronomicalandphysiologicalpersonations.”17ScarcelymorecomplimentaryisherestimateofthesupremeobjectsofworshiprecognizedbyChristianity. She names the gods of so-called monotheistic religions “ablasphemous and sorry caricature of the ever unknowable,”18 and affirms ofJehovah,“It isonly in thecapacityof thegeniusof themoon, the latterbeingcreditedintheoldcosmogonywithbeingtheparentoftheearth,thathecaneverberegardedasthecreatorofourglobe.”19Withanobviousintenttoheapscornupon Catholic Christianity, she extols SimonMagus and rates his system “asneartoOccultTruthasany.”20

17

Themost thatMadame Blavatsky concedes to Christianity is that Jesus inrespectofdispositionwas“asnobleandloving”asGautama,andthisstatementshequalifiesby thedeclaration thathewashandicappedbyappearing“amonganotherandlessspiritualrace.”21InrepeatedinstancessheaffirmstheprimacyofIndiainreligionandphilosophy.“Itismaintained,”shewrites,“thatIndiaistheonlycountry in theworldwhichstillhasamonghersonsadeptswhohavetheknowledgeofthesevensystems.…AsfortheHebrews,theyneverhadthehigherkeys.”22 She reads a lesson of humility toChristian scholarswhohavedealtwithEasternsystemsintheseterms:“OneneednotgoverydeepintotheliteratureoftheOrientaliststobecomeconvincedthatinmostcasestheydonotevensuspectthatinthearcanephilosophyofIndiatherearedepthswhichtheyhave not sounded, and cannot sound, for they pass on without perceivingthem.”23

WhileMadameBlavatskyoutrunsthegreatmajorityofTheosophicalwritersinthemeasureofherscornfulreferencestotheBibleandChristianity,aspiceofthesameelemententersintotheliteratureoftheentireschool.Inrareinstances,as in case of Colville, a serious effort may be made to place the ChristianreligiononaparitywiththeleadingsystemsofIndia;butevenintheseinstancesthis measure of credit is given not to historic Christianity, but to the schemewhichTheosophicdogmatismhasconstructedlargelyoutofHindumaterialsandhas chosen to identifywith esotericChristianity.Either implicitly or explicitlythe preference for the faiths of India comes to expression. The explicit formappearsintheremarkofJudge:“BuddhismisthelastofthegreatAvatars,andisinalargercirclethanisJesusoftheJews.”24EquallyclearintheirtestimonytothedirectionofpreferencearethewordsofLeadbeater:“Thebroadoutlinesofthegreattruthshavebeenwidelyknownintheworldforthousandsofyears,andaresoknownatthepresentday.ItisonlyweintheWestwho,inourincredibleself-sufficiency, have remained ignorant of them.”25Mrs. Besantmay also becitedinthisconnection,forwhileshepraisesJesusinferventwords,shemakeshimadebtortoEasternwisdom,ofwhichheisassumedtohavebeenadevotedstudentformanyyears.26Moreover,shefulfillsthepartofaresoluteapologistofHinduism.Tousethelanguageofacompetentobserver:“ThedepthstowhichMrs.BesanthabituallydescendsindefendingHinduismwillhardlybebelieved.There is scarcely an exploded doctrine, scarcely a superstitious observance,whichshehasnotdefended.NoonewhohasnotscannedthefilesoftheCentralHinduCollegeMagazineorthereportsofMrs.Besant’slecturesinIndiahasany

18

idea of the indescribable rubbishwhichTheosophyhas presented to itsHindumembers.”27

1. IsisUnveiled,I.70.↩2. Ibid.,I.490.↩3. KeytoTheosophy,pp.28,29.↩4. KeytoTheosophy,p.336.↩5. Ibid.,pp.188-193.↩6. Letter written in 1884 and cited by Lillie,MadameBlavatsky and her

Theosophy,p.16.↩7. StudiesinTheosophy,1891,p.224.CompareE.C.Farnsworth,Special

TeachingsfromtheArcaneScience,pp.159,160.↩8. Maskelyne, The Fraud of Modern Theosophy, second edition, 1912,

p.39.↩9. TheSecretDoctrine,I.647.↩10. Ibid.,III.341.↩11. ExtractsfromTheVahan,editedbySarahCorbett,p.616.↩12. ExtractsfromTheVahan,p.4.↩13. TheSevenPrinciplesofMan,p.58.↩14. TheSecretDoctrine,III.172.↩15. IbisUnveiled,II.211.↩16. TheSecretDoctrine,III.87.↩17. TheSecretDoctrine,III.172,173.↩18. Ibid.,Introduction,p.xx.↩19. Ibid.,II.474.↩20. Ibid.,III.113,465,466.↩21. TheSecretDoctrine,III.382.↩22. Ibid.,I.311.↩

19

23. IsisUnveiled,II.102,103.↩24. TheOceanofTheosophy,p.120.↩25. AnOutlineofTheosophy,p.9.↩26. EsotericChristianity,p.130.↩27. J. N. Farquhar,ModernReligiousMovements in India, 1915, pp. 287.

288.↩

20

Chapter4.TheBasisOfAuthority

On this theme two leading assumptions run through Theosophicalwritings: (1)There exists, and has existed from time immemorial, a body ofadvanced men, named Adepts, Mahatmas, Initiates, etc., who have served asdepositariesoftheprimitiveWisdom-Religion,andwhoaretheonlycompetentinterpretersofmanand theuniverse towhomanyaccess isprovided. (2)Thisbody of advanced men makes use of selected members of the TheosophicalSociety as instruments for disseminating such portions of their superiorknowledgeasmayfitlybeimpartedtothepresentage.

Leading Theosophical writers treat both of these assumptions as alikefundamentalandindisputable.ThehighstraininwhichtheydepicttheMahatmaorAdeptisasmarkedaspecimenofenthusiasticidealizationascanbefoundinmodernliterature.

“AMahatma,” saysMrs. Besant, “is a living man who has evolved morerapidly than the vast majority of the human race, and has reached a stage ofmental,moral, andspiritualdevelopmentwhichwillbeattainedby the race inthefutureonlyattheendofmillenniumsofyears.Heistheperfectedflowerofhumanity, the idealman, the promise of the future realized to-day. In him thespiritual nature is developed andworks unrestrainedly through themental andphysical,sothathehasbecomethemasterofallforcesinnatureandcanutilizethematwill.”1TheAdepts,Sinnettassuresus,canconversewithoneanotheratany distance, “and their clairvoyant faculties are so perfect and complete thattheyamounttoaspeciesofomniscienceasregardsmundaneaffairs.”2Heevenexpressesthebeliefthattheyareasfaraboveordinarymankindasmanisabovethe insects of the field.3 Their word, Judge tells us, has finality against anycompetingauthority.“Letsciencelaughasitmay, theAdeptsaretheonlytruescientists....Therecordsofthevisionsofthegreaterandlesserseers,throughtheages,areextantto-day.Oftheirmassnothinghasbeenacceptedexceptthatwhichhasbeencheckedandverifiedbymillionsof independentobservations.…IfwefindtheAdeptsstatingthatthemoonisnotamassthrownofffromtheearth in cooling,buton the contrary theprogenitorof thisglobe,weneednot

21

fearthejeersofasciencethatisasuncertainandunsafeinmanythingsasitispositive.”4 J.D.Buck expresses a likeviewof the relative competencyof theAdepts,classingthemasmen“whopossessaknowledgeofsciencesoprofoundastodwarfintoinsignificanceourboastedmoderndiscoveries.”5

One important source at the command of the Adepts is an unparalleledcollection of theworld’s literature. This unique advantage is thus depicted byMadame Blavatsky: “The members of several esoteric schools – the seat ofwhichisbeyondtheHimalayas–claimtohaveintheirpossessionthesumtotalofsacredandphilosophicalworksinmanuscriptandtype:alltheworks,infact,thathaveeverbeenwritten,inwhateverlanguageorcharacters,sincetheartofwriting began; from the ideographic hieroglyphs down to the alphabet ofCadmusand theDevanagan.”6With this statement she couples a report of theexistence in the subterranean passages under a single hamlet, located in amountaingorge,ofacollectionofbookstoolargetofindaccommodationintheBritishMuseum.

The principal habitat of the Adepts is commonly placed by Theosophicalopinion in Tibet. “They constitute,” writes Sinnett, “a Brotherhood, or SecretAssociation,thatramifiesallovertheEast,buttheprincipalseatofwhichforthepresentIgathertobeinTibet.”7Olcottevidentlyregardedthisastheorthodoxviewwhenhewrote:“On thehighplateauof theHimavataremenwhoknowpsychology,menwhoarethesuccessorsofathousandgenerationsofAryanandHindu sages,who all this timehaveknownwhatman is andwhat his powersare.”8

On the closeness of the bond between the Adepts and the TheosophicalSocietyourinformantswouldhaveusunderstandthatthereisnojustgroundforquestion.Thispointisobviously,forthem,ofgreatpracticalmoment,sincetheexistenceofAdeptswouldbenosortofacredentialfortheirsystemapartfromthe assumed choice of theAdepts to use them as a channel for their superiorwisdom.Asamatteroffact,themostconspicuousexponentsofTheosophyhavefollowedthepathoflogicalconsistency,andhavenotbeendeterredbyanunduemodesty from claiming the cooperation of the Great Brotherhood. MadameBlavatsky represented herself as only a kind of secondary agent in theproductionoftheworksbearinghername.IntheannouncementofIsisUnveiledshesaid:“Theworknowsubmittedtopublicjudgmentisthefruitofasomewhatintimate acquaintance with Eastern Adepts and study of their science.”9Doubtless it was on the basis of her testimony that Sinnett felt authorized toreport that great patches of the treatise were contributed outright by the

22

Brothers.10 On her essentially instrumental position in the production of TheSecret Doctrine, Madame Blavatsky was very outspoken, declaring in thepreface,“Thisworkisapartialstatementofwhattheauthorhasbeentaughtbymoreadvancedstudents, supplemented, ina fewdetailsonly,by the resultsofher own study and observation.” Elsewhere she styled the Mahatmas thefoundersandguardiansoftheTheosophicalSociety.“Wecallthem,”shesaid,"‘Masters’becausetheyareourteachers,andbecausefromthemwehavederivedall the Theosophical truths, however inadequately some of us have expressedthem,andothersunderstoodthem.“11Asisindicatedbythisstatement,shewastoo prudent to make the gentlemen behind the veil responsible for all verbalpeculiaritiesinTheosophicalwritings.Whilesheassertsthat”therearepassagesentirely dictated by them verbatim," she adds, “but in most cases they onlyinspiretheideas,andleavetheliteraryformtothewriters.”12SospeaksthehighpriestessofTheosophy,anditisevidentlybutasoberstatementofherteachingwhichisgivenusinthisproposition:“TheTheosophicalSocietyisthemediumthroughwhichtheBrothershaveundertakentopresenttotheworldtheirlong-cherisheddoctrines,insuchformastheworldisfoundreadytoreceive,”13

Itwill perhaps be objected to the above that Theosophists have sometimesasserted that members of their Society are privileged to be neutral on thequestion of the existence and agency of Mahatmas. But the motive for suchstatements has not come from the logic of their system, but, rather, from thedifficulty of securing any sort of credibility to the postulate on the actualexistenceofMahatmas.Mrs.Besant,however shemayhaveexpressedherselfelsewhere,simplyconformedtothelogicaldemandwhenshesaid:“IftherearenoMasters,thentheTheosophicalSocietyisanabsurdity.”14

1. ExpositionofTheosophy,p.19.↩2. TheOccultWorld,p.15.↩3. EsotericBuddhism,p.202.↩4. EchoesfromtheOrient,pp.10-14.↩5. TheNatureandAimofTheosophy,p.32.↩6. TheSecretDoctrine,Introduction,p.xxiii.↩7. TheOccultWorld,p.24.↩8. Theosophy,Religion,andOccultScience,pp.136,137.↩

23

9. IsisUnveiled,Preface.↩10. TheOccultWorld,p.160.↩11. TheKeytoTheosophy,pp.275,277.↩12. Ibid.,p.278.↩13. Buck,TheNatureandAimofTheosophy,pp.34,35.↩14. Article in Lucifer, December, 1890, cited byGarrett, Gaia VeryMuch

Unveiled,pp.106,107.↩

24

Chapter5.TheDoctrineOfGod

On this subjectTheosophicDogmatism is characterized in the firstplaceby a resolutedenial of thepersonalityofGod, that is, ofGodconsideredastheHighestBeing,theAbsolute.“Wereject,”saysMadameBlavatsky,“theideaofapersonalorextra-cosmicandanthropomorphicGod,”1andfromotherstatementswegatherthattherejectionextendstotheassumptionofdivinepersonality inanyforminwhich ithashadcurrency in theChristianChurch.

Herfundamentalpreferencefortheimpersonalappearsinhersubstitutionof“Universal Principle” or “Absolute Principle” for the name ofGod, as also insuch declarations as that the Absolute does not think or exist but is, rather,thought and existence.2 Scarcely less distinctly it appears in her rating ofVonHartmann’sphilosophyasthehighestphilosophyoftheWest.3ToaBeingthusconceived, creation, as the execution of plan or purpose, must evidently becounted foreign, and we have in place of it the notion of an inexplicablealternation of the differentiation and reabsorption of the world. “The esotericdoctrine,”writesMadameBlavatsky,“teaches,likeBuddhismandBrahmanism,andeventhepersecutedKabala,thattheoneinfiniteandunknownessenceexistsfromalleternity,andinregularandharmonioussuccessionsiseitherpassiveoractive.InthepoeticalphraseologyofManutheseconditionsarecalledthe‘day’andthe‘night’ofBrahma.”4ConsistentlywiththenegationofthepersonalityofGod,MadameBlavatskyrulesouttheproprietyofprayer,exceptinthesenseofaninternalcommand;andthisshedecidestoletpassasaprayertotheFatherinheavenintheesotericmeaningofthephrase–thatis,toGodinmanhimself.5AnequivalentinterpretationoftheFatherinheavenhasbeenprofferedbyA.A.Wells.6 Some representatives of Theosophy may have been rather moreappreciative of prayer in its objective relation than was the foundress, but incommontheyrejectthepersonalityoftheSupremeBeing.

Closely associated with this feature is an extreme emphasis on thetranscendence of God as Absolute Principle. The vacuity into whichNeoPlatonismpushes the thoughtofGod is rivaledbyoneandanotherwriter,

25

and especially by the most authoritative of all. Speculation on the UltimatePrinciple,MadameBlavatskyinformsus,isimpossible.“Itisbeyondtherangeandreachofthought.”Inspiteoftheparadoxicalappearanceofthestatement,intheAbsoluteisrealized“theideaofeternalNon-BeingwhichistheOneBeing.Itcannotbeconceivedtohaveanyrelationtothefiniteandconditioned.”7“Asto theAbsolute,” says Judge, “wecandonomore than say, It Is.Noneof thegreat teachers of the School ascribe qualities to the Absolute.”8 “The termAbsolute,” remarks G. R. S. Mead, “must be kept for the idea of the Deitybeyondbeing.”9

It is quite obvious that in pursuing this point of view the exponents ofTheosophyhavenotrespectedgreatlyeithertheclaimsofrationalityorofself-consistency. Theymight have reminded themselves that to place theAbsolutebeyondbeing is nomore eligible than to placeHimbelowbeing, since eitherformofexpressionrelegateshimtononentityornegateshisbeing,andinvolvesalso the feat of getting a plenum out of a vacuum y since all things areconfessedly from the Absolute. They would likewise have written to betteredification if, while declaring the Absolute to be inconceivable, they had notappliedtoitsuchtermsasOmnipresent,Eternal,Boundless,andImmutable;forthese terms, if there is any justification for using them, fulfill a descriptivefunction, while yet the strictly inconceivable is entirely out of the range ofdescription.Equally,anormalrespectforthedemandsofself-consistencywouldhavevetoed thecombinationof thestatement, that“all thatwhich isemanatesfromtheAbsolute,”10withthedeclarationthattheAbsolutecanhavenorelationwith the finite and conditioned, the rational verdict being that between sourceandproductthereisunavoidablyarealrelation.Likeallultradogmatismwhichmakesapretenseofagnosticismandhigh-flyingtranscendentalism,Theosophygetsbadlymixedupinitsexpositionofultimatereality.

What has been said thus far in the present chapter implies that theTheosophical doctrine of God and the universe is roundly pantheistic.Theosophists are not at all backward in confessing that their doctrine has thischaracter. Mrs. Besant says that “the Wisdom-Religion teaches a profoundpantheism,”thattechnicallysheisapantheist,andthat“intheologyTheosophyis pantheistic.”11 Madame Blavatsky abundantly illustrates every prominentfeatureoftheradicalBrahmanicalpantheismwhichfindsitsculminationintheVedanta system. As has been noted, she adopts the theory of differentiationsfrom the Absolute, alternating with reabsorptions. In her interpretation theevolvedworldisatemporaryillusion,asunrealasthereflectionofthemoonon

26

thesurfaceofthewaters.AsallisfromtheAbsolute,evilhasnoothersource;infact, good and evil are aspects or sides of the One Being. To all grades ofindividuatedbeingreabsorptionistheappointeddestiny.TheGodsattheendofthecyclearemergedintheoneAbsolute.12

MadameBlavatskyiscreditedwithhavingusedinoneconnectionthewords:“ThereisnoGod,personalorimpersonal.”13Butthisatheisticdeclarationistooexceptional to be emphasized. Properly she is characterized as a radicalpantheist, with a leaning to polytheism as against monotheism. This leaningcomes out, on the one hand, in contemptuous references to the monotheisticreligions,14 and, on the other, in polytheistic representations of the creativefunction. Inone instance sheascribes the creationof thebodiesofmen to theLunar Pitris and the endowment ofmenwith their immortal egos to the solarangels,15 and in another instance she employs this language: “It is not thePrinciple,OneandUnconditioned,norevenitsreflection,thatcreates,butonlythe Seven Gods who fashion the universe out of eternal matter, unified intoobjective life by the reflection into it of the One Reality.”16 This polytheisticphaseisclearlyduplicatedbyMrs.Besant.“EachLogos,”shewrites,“istohisownuniversethecentralobjectofadoration,andhisradiantministersarerightlyworshipedbythosewhocannotrisetotheconceptionofthiscentraldeity.”17Itmight be inferred from this statement that we do very well to stop with theLogos or Deity of our solar system, and so Leadbeater advises us.18 Sinnettpostulatesanobjectofreverencesomewhatmorelocal,tellingusthataMightyBeing, the Spirit of the Earth, presides over the growth and health of theplanet.19Evidently,inTheosophypantheismhasmadefriendswithpolytheism,andhereintheassimilationtoHinduismisverymarked.

1. TheKeytoTheosophy,p.61.↩2. TheKeytoTheosophy,pp.64,65.↩3. TheSecretDoctrine,I.281.↩4. IaisUnveiled,II.264.CompareJudge,OceanofTheosophypp.14,15.↩5. KeytoTheosophy,pp.66-68.↩6. ExtractsfromTheVahan,p.143.↩7. TheSecretDoctrine,I.14,45,III.205;TheKeytoTheosophy,pp.61,

62.↩

27

8. TheOceanofTheosophy,pp.14,15.↩9. ExtractsfromtheVahan,p.692.↩10. Blavatsky,TheSecretDoctrine,I.295;Judge,TheOceanofTheosophy,

pp.14,15.↩11. ExpositionofTheosophy,pp.5,28;WhyIAmaTheosophist,p.18.↩12. IsisUnveiled,II.264;TheSecretDoctrine,I.281,295,413,414;II.515;

III. 449, 450;Key toTheosophy, pp. 63, 83, 111, 132;TheCaves andJunglesofHindustan,p.49.↩

13. CitedfromtheTheosophist,May,1882.↩14. TheSecretDoctrine,Introduction,p.xx,II.158.↩15. Ibid.,II.88,89.↩16. TheSecretDoctrine,III.209.↩17. SomeProblemsofLife,pp.82,83.↩18. AnOutlineofTheosophy,p.24.↩19. TheGrowthoftheSoul,p.300.↩

28

Chapter6.CosmologicalTheories

Theosophy asserts the eternity of the world, though certainly withdoubtfulconsistencybythepenofMadameBlavatsky.Ontheonehandshelaysdown,asafundamentalproposition,“theeternityoftheuniverseintotoas a boundless plane, periodically the playground of numberless universes,incessantlymanifestinganddisappearing.”1Sheasserts,furthermore,thatmatteris eternal, the basis onwhich theUniversalMind builds its ideation.2 On theother hand she says: “The Creative Force is eternal as noumenon; as aphenomenalmanifestation in its aspects it has a beginning andmust thereforehaveanend.”3Moreover,havingdennedcreationastheEternalRealitycastingaperiodical reflection of itself on the infinite spatial depths, she adds: “Thisreflectionwhichyouregardastheobjectivematerialuniverse,weconsiderasatemporaryillusionandnothingelse.”4Puttingthevariousstatementstogetherweseem to reach the conclusion that theworld, as distinguished from the PrimalCauseorEternalReality,hadabeginningasaphenomenalmanifestation,andisinfactatemporaryillusion.Asuccessionofsuchworldsisindeedaffirmed;butitisnotwarrantabletoassumethattheadditionofthetemporalinauguratestheeternal.

The thesis on the illusory character of the world, which the foundressborrowed from Hindu philosophy, has found occasional utterance in theTheosophicalcamp.ThusA.A.Wellshasremarked:“Wemustneverforgetthat,after all, the great law ofKarma, and everythingwithwhich it deals, are butportionsofthegreatillusion–theMayawhichdefendsourweakeyesfromtheoverpoweringradianceofthedivineglory.”5Thereissomeground,however,forsuspecting that one and another among Theosophists entertain a rather scantyappreciation for the genuine Hindu doctrine of Maya or world-illusion. Wenotice that Sinnett is minded to interpret the doctrine as denoting only therelativeimpermanencyoftheworld.6

Anothergeneralcharacteristicaffirmedoftheworldistheuniversaldiffusionoflifeandevenofsentiency.MadameBlavatskyapproveshylozoismasbeinginitsphilosophicalsensecorrectpantheism.7Everythingintheuniverse,shesays,

29

evendowntothestones,hasaconsciousnessofitskind.8Judgeassertsthat“allnatureissentient.”9“Thereisnodifference,”writesBurchamHarding,“saveindegree,betweenthe lives thatarefoundin theminerals, inplantsand trees, inanimalandhumanbodies–forallarepartsoftheOneLife.”10

Madame Blavatsky has been cited on the necessary function of theTheosophical Society as a bulwark against a threatening materialism.Mrs.BesantdignifiestheofficeoftheSocietyinsimilarterms.“Ilookuponthere-proclamation of Theosophy,” she says, “as the deliberate answer of theMasters,theAdepts,totheriseofmaterialismintheWesternworld.”11Inviewofsuchstatements,wenaturallyareledtoexpectthatTheosophicalwritingswillappearthoroughlychargedwithspiritualisticoranti-materialisticteachings.Butthatisnotfoundtobethecase.Ifbymaterialismismeantatheoreticsystemofaparticular type, then Theosophy can be said, rather, to compromise withmaterialism than to carry out a consistent opposition. It does not uniformlyassignadistinctprimacytospiritasagainstmatter.Doubtlessstatementsmaybefound,likethedeclarationofColville,that“spiritisbothAlphaandOmega.”12But representations which carry a quite different suggestion also occur. Nojustice isdone to theprimacyofspirit inMadameBlavatsky’sdeclaration thatspiritandmatter“arebutthetwofacetsoftheoneAbsoluteExistence”13or inthefurtherassertion,“spiritandmatterareone,beingthetwooppositepolesoftheuniversalmanifestedsubstance”;14or intheplainadmissionthatsheinsistsupon the identity of spirit and matter, rating spirit as potential matter, “andmatter simply crystallized spirit, just as ice is solidified steam.”15 In herpsychological theory, as cited by Mrs. Besant,16 she gives place to thethoroughly materialistic representation that " thought is matter." Mrs. Besantunequivocally adopts this point of view, and carries it out in a series ofstatements as crasslymaterialistic as can be found in the literature ofmodernmaterialism.

“AThoughtform,”sheaffirms,“isamaterialimagecreatedbythemindoutof the subtlematter of thehigherpsychicplane inwhich itworks.This form,composed of the rapidly vibrating atoms of thematter of that region, sets upvibrationsallaroundit.”17“Pureandloftythoughts,”shesays,“arecomposedofrapidvibrations....Vibrationsofconsciousnessareevershakingoutonekindof matter and building in another.”18 “Thought images,” she tells us, “oncegenerated,assumeanexistenceoftheirown,passoutwardintotheastralrealm,and act therefrom on the minds of other men, influencing them to action.”19Commendingthesamepointofview,Leadbeaterteachesthatthoughtsareina

30

real sense things and to clairvoyant sight assume form and color. Rate ofvibration,heindicates,isaprincipaldeterminantofthegradeofbeing.“Physicalmattermaybecomeastral,orastralmaybecomemental,ifonlyitbesufficientlysubdivided, andcaused tovibratewith theproperdegreeof rapidity.”20Whilethesoulofman,urgesSinnett,ismuchmoresubtleandlastingthanthebody,itisitself“amaterialreality.”21WithJudgewefindthecomprehensivestatementthattheuniverseexists“forthepurposeofraisingtheentiremassofmanifestedmatter up to the stature, nature, and dignity of conscious godhood;”22 andMrs. Besant makes it an important part of man’s task to sublime matter intospirit.23Inshort,itisplainenoughthatTheosophy,asunderstoodbyitsleadingexponents, is broadly streaked with materialistic tenets. So far at least aspsychological theory is concerned, it rivals the ultra declarations of suchmaterialistsasVogt,Moleschott,Buchner,andCabanis.

A detailed description of the universe as a whole does not appear to havebeen attempted by representatives of modern Theosophy. The domain withwhich they are specially concerned is that complex sphere which serves as atheaterofman’smultipliedperegrinations.Aboutthistheyhave,oratleastclaimtohave,amassofinformationthatistrulyastonishing.Ourearth,theytellus,isone in a chain of seven planets. This chain is quite extraordinary,most of itsmembersbeingentirelyunknowntoastronomyascommonlyunderstood.Onlyourearth,accordingtoMadameBlavatsky,isinthevisibledomain.24Sinnett,onthe other hand, includesMars andMercury in that domain, and assumes thatonly four out of the seven planets in the chain are composed of matter soethereal that telescopes cannot take cognizance of them.25 ReckoningMars asthirdinthelist,theearthasfourth,andMercuryasfifth,hesupposesexistenceon the first and seventh to be of the Devachanic (or heavenly) type, on thesecond and sixth to be astral in nature.26 Man as a subject of evolution andprogressisundercompulsiontovisittheseseveralspheresinaseriesofrounds,andthetimerequiredfortherepeatedgyrationsofhispilgrimageisnothinglessthanenormous.Eventhenumberofperiodswhichhemustspendontheearth,iswell-nigh overwhelming to contemplate. “An individual unit, arriving on aplanetforthefirsttimeinthecourseofaround,hastoworkthroughsevenracesonthatplanetbeforehepassesontothenext,andeachoftheseracesoccupiesthe earth for a long time. Within the limits of each race there are sevensubdivisional races, and again within the limits of each subdivision there aresevenbranch races.Throughall these races, roughlyspeaking,each individual

31

humanunitmustpassduringhisstayonearth,eachtimehearrivesthere,onaroundofprogress,throughtheplanetarysystem.”27

Supposing the recollection of one journey to be carried on to the next, theitinerantwouldhaveanopportunitytonotegreatchangesintheearth’ssurface,such as the sinking of the immense continent of Atlantis in the region nowoccupiedbytheAtlanticOcean,andalsothesubmergenceofthegreaterpartofthe continent of Lemuria, which once stretched from the Indian Ocean toAustralia.Theoneeventoccupied,weareinformedwithremarkableprecision,aperiodof11,466years, and theother tookplaceabout700,000yearsearlier.28With an insight in likemanner greatly transcending themeasures of ordinaryscience our authorities assure us that besides the planetary chain ofwhich theearth is a member there are six others within the solar system;29 but anyconsiderablenumberofdetailsrespectingtheseseemsnottohavebeendivulgedbytheMahatmas.

Thepreferenceentertainedby theTheosophists forancientmythology,overagainst the inductions of recent science, is very strikingly illustrated by theirassumptionontheveryimportantrelationsustainedbythemoontotheearth.“Itis the moon,” writes Madame Blavatsky, “that plays the largest and mostimportant part, aswell in the formation of the earth itself, as in the peoplingthereofwithhumanbeings....Themoonisfarolderthantheearth;anditisthelatterwhichowesitsbeingtotheformer....Themoonisthegiveroflifetoourglobe.”30

The superiority of Theosophical information to the conclusions of sciencecrops out likewise in the representation respecting a deep orifice in the polarregions. “It has been vaguely known,” says Sinnett, “by occult students for along time that in the neighborhood of the north pole there is an orifice in theground penetrating to inconceivable depths. This wonderful shaft has beenregardedasfulfillingsomemysteriousneedoftheearth,analogoustobreathing,and it has been supposed that a similar shaft connects the southpolewith theinterior.”31

ThefruitfulnessofmythologyfortheTheosophicalmindisalsoillustratedinnotionsontheexistenceandfunctionsof“elementals.”MadameBlavatskygivesthisname to thecreaturesevolved in the fourkingdomsofearth, air, fire, andwater,andcalledbytheKabalistsgnomes,sylphs,salamanders,andundines.

“Theseelementalsare theprincipalagentsofdisembodiedbutnevervisiblespirits at seances, and the producers of all the phenomena except thesubjective.”32TheAdepts,Sinnettinformsus,havegoodreasonsforpreserving

32

a relative silence respecting the elementals; he considers himself, however,qualifiedtostatethattheyaresemi-intelligentcreaturesoftheastrallight,33onedivisionofwhichmayhavebeenformedbythehumanwillfromtheoceanofelementalessence,whileothervarietiesareduetonaturalevolution.34

The chapter should not be closed without a reference to world periods asconceived by Theosophists. With genuine Hindu prodigality they pile up theyearsintheirreckoningtoadizzyheight.TheManvantaras,wearetold,followone another like successive waves, and a Manvantara is a grand periodcomprising311,040,000,000,000years.Theproperhistoryofmanbegannolessthan18,000,000yearsago.35

1. TheSecretDoctrine,I.16.↩2. Ibid.,I.280.↩3. Ibid.,I.373,374.↩4. TheKeytoTheosophy,p.83.↩5. ExtractsfromtheVahan,pp.153,154.↩6. TheGrowthoftheSoul,pp.100,101.↩7. TheSecretDoctrine,II.158.↩8. Ibid.,I.274.↩9. TheOceanofTheosophy,p.2.↩10. BrotherhoodNature’sLaw,pp.5,6.↩11. ExpositionofTheosophy,p.29.↩12. StudiesinTheosophy,p.201.↩13. TheSecretDoctrine,I.326.↩14. TheKeytoTheosophy,p.215.↩15. Ibid.,pp.33,34.↩16. Karma,pp.74,75.↩17. Karma,p.13.↩18. ThoughtPower,pp.27,28.↩

33

19. ExpositionofTheosophy,pp.13-15.↩20. AnOutlineofTheosophy,pp.38,86.↩21. TheOccultWorld,p.19.↩22. TheOoeanofTheosophy,p.60.↩23. Reincarnation,p.12.↩24. TheKeytoTheosophy,p.87.↩25. EsotericBuddhism,pp.136,137.↩26. TheGrowthoftheSoul,pp.263,264.↩27. Sinnett,EsotericBuddhism,pp.58,59.↩28. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, II. 6-8; Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism,

pp.64,65.↩29. Sinnett,EsotericBuddhism,p.197.↩30. TheSecretDoctrine,I.180,386;II.64.CompareJudgeEchoesfromthe

Orient,p.14.↩31. TheGrowthoftheSoul,p.297.↩32. IsisUnveiled,Preface,pp.xxix,xxx.↩33. EsotericBuddhism,p.105.↩34. TheGrowthoftheSoul,p.220.↩35. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, I. 36; II. 9; Judge, Echoes from the

Orient,pp.38-40;TheOceanofTheosophy,pp.21,22.↩

34

Chapter7.ConceptionsOfManAndHisDestiny

To achieve a clear exposition of this theme is no easy task. Thepredilection of Theosophists for the grandiose and complex, their pedanticmultiplication of Sanskrit terms in place of plain English, and their slovenlyneglectoftheproperdistinctionbetweenthematerialandthespiritual,combinetoweary and puzzle themind of the interpreter. If any should be disposed toblameusforlackofclarityandsimplicityinourtreatmentofthepresentsubject,lethimblamestillmoretheMahatmasfornothavingfurnishedbetterguidancetotheoraclesofTheosophicalwisdom.

In theevolutionaryschemeofTheosophy thegenesisofman isdepictedasstartingfromthedivineessence,andtheneffectedthroughsuccessivestagesupto the present stage of concreteness or condensation. “When the globe wasforming,” as one of our oracles reports, “the first root-race was more or lessethereal and had no such body as we now inhabit. The cosmic environmentbecame more dense and a second race appeared, soon after which the firstwhollydisappeared.Thenthethirdcameonthescene,afteranimmenselapseoftime, during which the second had been developing the bodies needed in thethird.Atthecomingofthefourthroot-raceitissaidthatthepresenthumanformwasevolved,althoughgigantic,andinsomerespectsdifferentfromourown.Itis from this point – the fourth race – that the Theosophical system begins tospeakofman as such,”1 That the racewhich eventuated inman proper is notrepresented by fossil remains in remote geological formations is explained bythetenuityoftheastralbodieswhichatthatstagewereinevidence.2Infact,asanotherinformantassuresus, intracingman’sgenesiswearecarriedbacktoakindofnebula,abasisofhumanitywhichconsistedsimplyinagreatcloudofdivineessence.“3Agaseousentityofthesortindicatedcouldnotbeexpectedtoleavedefinitememorialsinthegeologicalrecords.ThatmuchweconcedetotheTheosophicapologist,thoughnotalittletakenbackbyhisidentificationofthedivine essence with an extended and volatile substance. But what about ournearer antecedents, the giganticmen of the fourth root-race?We suppose thatMadameBlavatskyrefers to this racewhenshe teaches that”physicalmanwas

35

originally a colossal pretertiary giant," and that “he existed 18,000,000 yearsago.”4Whathasbecomeof.hisremains?Possiblyitwillbesuggestedthat thegigantic race, as being identicalwith theAtlanteans,went below the plane ofobservation in the sinking of the continent of Atlantis. But, according to thereported figures, it took thatcontinent11,466years topass to itsoceangrave,and itwould seem that during so long aperiod someof theAtlanteanswouldhavehadthediscretiontoemigratetohigherandsaferground.

AmericansandEuropeansaredefinedaslinealdescendantsoftheAtlanteans,or, more precisely, as Atlantean monads reincarnated.5 As a further aid inlocatingourselveswemaynotethatintheseptenaryschemewhichTheosophicinsighthasdiscoveredtoobtaininthecosmosweareinthefifthsub-raceofthefifth race of the fourth round.6 This location involves the conclusion that ourcyclic movements must go on for an incalculable period still. No plea ofdizziness canbe expected to secure our releasefromanyof the rounds or fromany of the minor circles included therein. In Theosophical anthropology theassumptionthatmanisseptenaryinnature,orincludeswithinthecompassofhisbeingsevenprinciples,isafundamentaldogma.Yet,strangelyenough,MadameBlavatsky had not arrived at the knowledge of it at the time she wrote IsisUnveiled.Inthatelaboratetreatiseshenotonlyfailedtoinculcatetheseptenarynature of man, but taught a contradictory view, as appears in this statement:“Manistriune:hehashisobjectivephysicalbody,hisvitalizingastralbody(orsoul),therealman;andthesearebroodedoverbythethird–thesovereign,theimmortalspirit.”7

The list of seven principles in one of its earlier versions includes thefollowing:(1)Body,orrupa:(2)vitality,orpranajiva;(3)astralbody;(4)animalsoul,orKama-rupa;(5)humansoul,ormanas;(6)spiritualsoul,orbuddhi;(7)spirit,oratma.8Inalaterlistwehavetheseconstituents:(1)Physicalbody;(2)ethericdouble; (3) jiva,or life-force; (4)astralvehicle; (5)manas; (6)buddhi;(7) atma.9 Another version of the seven principles, also comparatively recent,gives this series: (1) dense body; (2) etheric double; (3) prana or vitality; (4)kama,oranimalsoul;(5)manas;(6)buddhi;(7)atma.10Thefirstfourofthesearecharacterizedastheperishablequatenary,andthelastthreeastheimmortaltriad. It accords with the Theosophical disparagement of personality that thistermshouldbeappliedto theperishablequatenary.11The trueman, the lastingindividuality,isleftthustobeidentifiedwithmanas,buddhi,andatma.Butitisnot altogether clear how this triad is to be construed. One exponent ofTheosophytellsusthatthespirit,oratman,isnoindividualpropertyofanyman,

36

but thedivineessencewhichby itsomnipresent light radiated throughbuddhi,itsvehicleanddirectemanation,pervadesthewholebody.12Asecondexponentinformsusthatbothatmaandbuddhiarenotproperlyincarnatedinthepresentrace,butoccupythebodysimplybyshininguponmanas,theprinciplewhichisreally incarnated.13 In any case the description of the triad, in which man’shigherselfconsists,doesnotseemto introduceus toawell-compactedhumansubject.Whatweareledtocontemplateisamentalorpsychicalprinciplewithwhich,atfirst-handorsecond-hand,adivinerayisconnected.

Among the curious specifications on the composition and history of thehuman subject, which meet us in Theosophical literature, we select thefollowing:Theethericdouble isapreciseduplicateof thedensebody,and themediumthroughwhich theelectricalandvitalcurrentsplay. It iscomposedoffourethers,distinguishedbydifferentdegreesoffineness.Normallytheethericdouble is separated from the dense body only at death, but occasionallyspiritualisticmediumsexperienceat leastapartialseparationduring theperiodofearthly life. In itsseparatestate theethericdouble isdissipatedafterabriefinterval. The astral body is composed of a different and more subtle kind ofmatter.Inthisbodythesevensubstatesofastralmatterarecombined.Ittravelswithexceeding rapidity, andeitherduringearthly lifeor aftermay show itselfapartfromthephysicalbody.Toonewhoisclairvoyantthemanifestationeasilyoccurs, and in case of one who is not it is possible by a greater or lessappropriation of physical matter from the atmosphere for the astral body toacquire visibility. During earthly life the seven substates of astral matter areintermingled,but afterdeath theyare sorted into concentric shells, thedensestbeingoutside.Theseshellsmayfunctioninspiritualisticseances.Theymustallbedisintegratedbefore thedeceasedpersoncanpass into theblissfulregionofDevachan. The period of disintegration, longer or shorter according to theprecedingrecordofthesubject,isproperlycharacterizedasapurgatorialperiod.To theregionwhere thepurgation takesplace isgiven thenameofKamaloka.Theeliminationoftheastralbodyleavesthepersonwiththemind-body,whichis composed of more subtle matter still, taken from the four lower levels ofDevachan, and disintegrating when these levels have been passed. It is egg-shaped,richlycolored,andwithoutdifferentiationofthesenses.14

ThelifeinDevachan,asTheosophistscalltheirheaven,isnotofstrictlyfixedduration, but is said to last from ten to fifteen centuries.15 The measure ofhappinessenjoyedinDevachanisnotclaimedtobeuniformforallsubjects,butTheosophicalwritersarequiteunanimousintheaffirmationthatnopain,sorrow,

37

ordisappointmentcanenterthere.“Itis,”wearetold,“aspeciallyguardedpartofthementalplanewhenceallsorrowandallevilareexcludedbytheactionofthegreatspiritualintelligenceswhosuperintendhumanevolution.”16InitstypetheDevachaniclifeispurelysubjective, thoughit isfarfrombeingrecognizedassuchbytheonewhohasenteredintoit.

“Theforms,scenery,etc.,whichtheconsciousnessperceivesinthatconditionarethecreaturesofitsownmentalenergies.”17Thereresults,however,agradualexhaustionof force, passing into semi-consciousness and ending in “birth intoanother personality.”18 It is in this reincarnate state that the sinner in generalmustreapthefruitsofhisevildeeds.OnlytheexceptionalcriminalisdeprivedofthetemporaryimmunityfromsufferingsenjoyedinDevachanandismadetopayinAvitchithepenaltyofsubjectivespiritualmiseryforaperiod.19InspiteoftheemphaticdescriptionoftheunalloyedblissofDevachan,itwouldappearthatthehappystateisnotperfectlyguardedagainstanelementofunrest.Eventherearises the desire for active life, the thirst for sentient existence, which is thefundamental causeof reincarnation, asof allmanifestation.20This is the innerground of reincarnation operative in the individual. In addition there is theworkingofKarma,thatis,ofanunerringlawofretribution,animpersonalever-active principle which grips the world and determines both the fact and theconditionsofrebirth.Untilhisscorehasbeenpaidamanmustbereborn,andinrebirthbegivenalotcorrespondentwithhisantecedentrecord.21

The doctrine of reincarnation was taken over from Hinduism into thefundamentalsofTheosophy,thoughinthetransferencetherewasamodificationto theextentof rejecting the idea thatamanmayberebornasananimal.Theborrowing isapparentnotonly from thecontentof thedoctrineas set forth instandard writings, but also from the fact that it was first taken up andpromulgated by the Theosophical leaders after they had gone to India. In IsisUnveiled, which was written in America, Madame Blavatsky repudiatedreincarnation as any part of a regular economy, and treated it as emphaticallyexceptional.

“Reincarnation,” shewrote, “that is, theappearanceof the same individual,or,rather,oftheastralmonad,twiceonthesameplanet,isnotaruleofnature;itis anexception, like the teratologicalphenomenonof a twoheaded infant. It ispreceded by a violation of the laws of harmony of nature, and happens onlywhen the latter, seeking to restore its disturbed equilibrium, violently throwsbackintoearth-lifetheastralmonadwhichhadbeentossedoutofthecircleofnecessity by crime or accident.”22 Neither Gautama nor Pythagoras, she

38

declared, intended to teacha literalmetempsychosis,butemployed the terminits esoteric sense and applied it to “the purely spiritual peregrinations of thehuman soul.”23 In the face of these unequivocal statements her subsequentattempt to explain away her denial of reincarnation24 can be rated only asperfectly obvious and perfectly abortive prevarication. Olcott, with betterdiscretion,aswellaswithlargerhonesty,stoodbythefacts,declaringthatatthetimeofembarkingforIndia(December17,1878),bothMadameBlavatskyandhimself thought that reincarnation isexceptional,and that thedoctrinewasnotfully launched till 1881-82, though a bare allusion to it occurred in theTheosophist forOctober, 1879.Theproblemwhy theMahatmaspermitted themistakehegaveupasinsoluble.25

Fromrepudiatingtheideaofreincarnation,Theosophywentontoaffirmingitinmostgenerousmeasure.Accordingtoitspronouncement,itisnotafewtimesonlythattheindividualisreclothedwithabody.“Theactualnormalnumberofincarnationsforeachmonadisnotfarshortofeighthundred.”26

Sincemonads,or souls, are everonhand for reincarnation, thedemand forthe creation, emanation, or evolution of new souls is evidentlymodified quiteappreciably.We are informed that nothing of that kind has occurred since themiddleofthefourthrace,27andthat“thetotalnumberofhumanegosincludedinour evolution is in round numbers about sixty billions.”28 How this long-standing numerical fixity of the race agrees with the common historicalinductionastotheprogressiveincreaseofpopulationontheearthisaquestionthat naturally arises. We have not observed that this question has beensatisfactorily answered. Mrs. Besant’s plea that those incarnated at any timeconstituteonly aminorportionof the totalnumberof souls isno real answer.Sincesoulsarereincarnatedafterpassingthroughaproperroundofexperiences,or,generally speaking,once in fifteenhundredyears,a reason forachangeofproportion between the incarnated and those awaiting incarnation is notapparent.

Lackofrecollectionofapreviouslife,itisclaimed,isnotanobjectiontothefactofpreexistence,sincetheorgansinstrumentaltoreminiscence,whichwereoperative in the former stage of existence, have perished;moreover, Buddhasand Initiates, it is averred, do remember their past incarnations, not to discusswhatmaybepossibleforlessadvancedspirits.29Aspositivegroundsforbeliefin reincarnation such facts are alleged as the appearance of great diversitieswithin the limits of a given family, infant precocity, exceptional genius, andseemingdiscrepancybetweenpresentlotanddesert.

39

TheidealgoaltowardwhichtheseriesofincarnationsissupposedtoleadisNirvana.However, themeaning attached to this term seems not to have beenuniformly the same in Theosophical circles. Madame Blavatsky is free toemployformsofdescriptionwhichimplythecompletesubmergenceornegationof individuality.Theconsummation isnot reached,she tellsus,“till theunit ismergedintheall,andsubjectandobjectalikevanishintheabsolutenegationoftheNirvanicstate.”30The immortalityof anentity is tobeunderstoodonly inrelationtoitscycle.Attheendofthatitis“oneandidenticalwiththeUniversalSpirit,andnolongeraseparateentity,”31Ontheotherhand,statementsoccurinTheosophical writings which are designed to convey the impression that theindividualdoesnot somuch suffer extinction asgain expansion inNirvana. Itdoes not appear that anything worth while has been accomplished towardclearingawayBuddhisticmistonthissubject.

IsNirvanaanabsolutelyfinalgoal,orhasitonlyarelativefinality?Explicittestimonyonthispointisnotoftenfurnished.ButifMrs.Besantrepresentstheprevailing conviction, the decision is for relative finality. It is her plaindeclarationthattheonewhohasattainedNirvanareturnstocosmicactivityinanew cycle of manifestation.32 As much may possibly be implied in thedeclaration of Madame Blavatsky that, according to the Brahmanical andesotericdoctrine,thereisanendlessevolutionandreinvolution(orreabsorption)ofthecosmos.33ThisatleastsuggeststhatwhatisinNirvanaisevolvedagain.IfMadameBlavatskymeanttoindorsethisview,shewouldneedtoexplainhowthecompletelyvanished individualsofherschemecouldbe recovered.On thewhole,theconclusioniswarrantedthatTheosophysetsforthnoultimategoalformen, unless it be in the complete cessation of personal existence. It does notoffer any prospect of a satisfactory escape from the fearfully drawn outalternationbetweenlifeanddeath,birthanddissolution,whichhasrestedlikeanightmareuponthesoulofIndia.

1. Judge,EchoesfromtheOrient,p.23.↩2. Judge,EchoesfromtheOrient,pp.39,40.↩3. Leadbeater,AnOutlineofTheosophy,pp.76,77.↩4. TheSecretDoctrine,II.9.↩5. Judge,EchoesfromtheOrient,pp.20,21.↩

40

6. Besant, The Seven Principles of Man, pp. 69, 70; Sinnett, EsotericBuddhism,p.58.↩

7. IrisUnveiled,II.588.↩8. Judge,TheOceanofTheosophy,p.31.↩9. Sinnett,TheGrowthoftheSoul,p.156.↩10. Besant,DeathandAfter,p.13.↩11. Besant,TheSevenPrinciplesofMan,p.24.↩12. Blavatsky,TheKeytoTheosophy,pp.100.101.↩13. Judge,TheOceanofTheosophy,p.66.↩14. SeeinparticularBesant,ManandHisBodies.↩15. Blavatsky,TheKey toTheosophy, p. 144:Sinnett,EsotericBuddhism,

p.143;Leadbeater,ExtractsfromtheVahan,p.36.↩16. Besant,TheAncientWisdom,pp.137,138.↩17. Keightley,ExtractsfromtheVahan,p.395;Sinnett,EsotericBuddhism,

pp.81,82.↩18. Sinnett,Ibid.,p.88.↩19. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, p. 93; Colville, Studies in Theoeopby,

p.172.↩20. Besant,Reincarnation,p.37.↩21. Blavatsky,TheSecretDoctrine,I.634.↩22. IsisUnveiled,I.351,352.↩23. Ibid.,I.289.↩24. TheKeytoTheosophy,pp.187,188.↩25. OldDiaryLeaves,pp.283-289.↩26. Sinnett,EsotericBuddhism,p.61.↩27. Besant,TheSevenPrinciplesofMan,p.69.↩28. Keightley,ExtractsfromtheVahan,p.28.↩

41

29. Blavatsky, TheKey to Theosophy, p. 162; Sinnett, TheGrowth of theSoul,pp.54,55.↩

30. TheSecretDoctrine,I.329,330.↩31. TheKeytoTheosophy,p.106.↩32. DeathandAfter,p.69;ExpositionofTheosophy,pp.22,23.↩33. TheSecretDoctrine,I.148.↩

42

Chapter8.TheTheosophicPrincipleOfAuthorityTested

TheosophistsclaimthattheirsystemisareproductionoftheancientWisdom-Religion, through theagencyofperfectedmencalledMahatmasorAdepts, who have chosen to make use of the Theosophical Society as aninstrumentofcommunication.Thatthisclaimisfundamentalneednotbearguedhere.Inaprecedingchapteritwasshownthattheexistenceandeffectiveagencyof theMahatmas has been a very vital assumptionwithTheosophicalwriters,andthatit isonlybyamostpalpablelapsefromself-consistencythattheycanbringthesemattersunderthecategoryoftheindifferentoroptional.Iftheyhavenotbeenfavoredwithauthoritativeinstructors,itisplainlyridiculousforthemtoputforthmultiplieddogmaticconclusionswhicharequitebeyondthedomainofconcrete verification.Apart from the plea of exceptional instruction they havenot the slightestwarrant to claim for themass of their propositions anybettercharacter than that of disputable conjectures. It is quite pertinent, therefore, toenumeratethevariousgroundsforradicalskepticismastotheassumedexistenceandagencyoftheMahatmas,andweproceedatoncetoplacetheseinorder.

1.MadameBlavatskyfalsifiedherHistorywithSpiritualism

The primary and principal witness, Madame Blavatsky, is fundamentallydiscreditedbyherdemonstratedcapabilityofdownrightfalsifying.This trait isconspicuouslyexhibitedinherexpositionofherrelationswithSpiritualism.Ashasbeennoticed, itsuitedherata timewhenTheosophywasinfullswing, tospeakofSpiritualisminverydisparagingterms.Morethanthis,shespecifiedtheputting down of Spiritualism as one of the main objects of the Theosophicalmovement,1anddeclaredflatlythatsheneverwasaSpiritualist.2Howflagrantlyinthesestatementsshehascontradictedherselfcanbediscoveredbyreviewing

43

hercorrespondencewithhercountryman,A.N.Aksakoff.Inthefallof1874shewrote:“IhavenowbeenaSpiritualistformorethantenyears,andnowallmylifeisdevotedtothedoctrine.Iamstrugglingforitandtryingtoconsecratetoiteverymomentofmy life.” InFebruary, 1875, shedeclared, “I have sacrificedmyself forSpiritualism,and indefenseofmyfaithand the truthIamreadyatanymomenttolaymyheadontheblock. . . .Nowthespiritsaremybrothersandsisters,myfatherandmother.MyJohnKingisasufficientrecompenseforall,heisahostinhimselftome.”LaterinthesameyearshespokeasthoughtheTheosophical Society, which was being founded, would take up Spiritualismalong with other ingredients. “Wewant,” she said, “to make an experimentalcomparison between Spiritualism and the magic of the ancients by followingliterally theoldCabbalas,bothJewishandChristian.” InDecember,1875,sheremarkedofTheosophy:“ItisthesameSpiritualismbutunderanothername.”3SobyherownhandMadameBlavatskyconvictedherself ofbeing capableofbarefacedfalsehood.Herword,accordingly,makesaveryslenderfoundationforthefactofintercommunionwithanextraordinaryclassofmencalledMahatmas.

2.MadameBlavatskyPlayedtheRoleofaCharlatanandTrickster.

Madame Blavatsky’s worth as a witness is very much qualified by theevidencethatshewascapableofplayingtheroleofthecharlatanandtrickster.Among the demonstrationswhich she affordedof this capability, that given atAdyar, India, was especially notable. At this place, which was made theheadquarters of the Theosophists, the apartments of Madame Blavatsky wereprovidedwithvery convenient adjuncts in the shapeof anoccult roomwith ashrineorcupboardsoplacedastoconcealaholeinthewallandfurnishedwithslidingpanels in thebackthroughwhich,whenthedoors infrontwereclosed,lettersandotherarticlescouldbesecretlyintroduced.ThesepeculiaritiesinthefurnishingofthehousearenotdisputedbytheapologistsofMadameBlavatsky.TheyclaimthattheyweremadeafterherdeparturetoEurope,earlyin1884,bythecustodiansofthehouse,Mr.andMrs.Coulomb,whowerepromptedtothedeedbyselfishandunfriendlymotives.

In this way they would exculpate their leader from the charge ofsurreptitiously introducing pretended messages from the Mahatmas into theshrineandofusingitforotherfictitiousmarvels.But thisapologyisnotatall

44

convincing. Besides imputing to the Coulombs an incredible stretch of subtlemachination, it is discredited by the fact that, in the absence of MadameBlavatsky,azealousadherent,anativebythenameofDamodar,heldthekeystotheoccult roomand theshrine.Moreover, therewereextant some forty lettersaddressedmainlytoMrs.Coulombandcontainingampleproofthatthestrikingphenomena, which were so potent to win adherents among the Hindus, weremattersofcontrivance,bothMr.andMrs.Coulomb,asemployeesofMadameBlavatsky,beingusedascoagents.Aswastobeexpected,anattemptwasmadetorebutthisdocumentarydemonstrationbytheallegationthattheletterswereinwholeorinpartforged.Buttheattemptmustbepronouncedquitefutile.Inthefirstplace, thecontentsof thedocumentsspokestronglyfor theirgenuineness.“The letters contained scores of references to leadingHindus and governmentofficialsalloverIndia,withdetailsofwhathappenedwhenMadameBlavatskywas in their houses and when she met them casually. No forger would havedared to invent suchdetails. If theyhadbeen forged, a fewpersonal inquirieswouldatoncehaveexposedthem.”4Inthesecondplace,acarefulinvestigationadded a strong support to the impression of genuinenessmade by the letters.This investigation was made at the instance of the Society for PsychicalResearch.AsitsrepresentativeR.HodgsonwenttoIndianeartheendof1884,and gave three months to a painstaking examination of the character of thephenomena.

Allpartiesmorenearlyconcernedwerecalledtothewitnessstand,includingMadame Blavatsky and Colonel Olcott. One or another of the witnesses wasdiscredited by cross-examination. The Coulombs, however, were not of thisnumber.Itwasfoundimpossibletobreakdownanyoftheirstatementsthatwereatallmaterial,andwherecorroborationwasinthenatureofthecasepossibleitwasfoundnottobelacking.Theresultwaswhollyinfavorofthegenuinenessof the damaging letters.5 In the third place, the handwriting of the letters,accordingtothejudgmentofcompetentexperts,wasthatofMadameBlavatsky.Referring to thispointeightornineyearsafter the investigationwhichhehadconductedinIndia,andhavingbeforehimthebestthatTheosophicalapologistswereable tosay,Hodgsonfeltauthorized todeclare:“Thefact remains that inthe opinion of the best experts obtainable the BlavatskyCoulomb documentswere undoubtedlywritten byMadameBlavatsky, and I know of no expert inhandwriting who has examined the letters who has expressed any differentopinion.”6

45

Theevidence just recounted thatMadameBlavatsky, in the attempt togivecredencetotheexistenceandagencyofMahatmas,playedagameofdeceptionreceivessomewhatofasupplementinthetestimonyofSolovyoff.ThisRussiangentlemanvisitedheralmostdailyfortwomonthsatParis,andalsohadfrequentinterviewswithheratWurzburg.Inthelatterplacehedetectedheremploymentof trickery for theproductionofpretendedmarvels, and succeeded in elicitingfromheraconfessiononthefictitiouscharacterofthephenomenatowhichshehad been resorting as a means of propagandism. The confession was indeedquicklywithdrawn,havingbeenmadewithoutanyrealcontrition.Solovyoffwaswell assured from that time that the marvelous performances of MadameBlavatskycouldbereducedtoasmallresiduum.’Thereis,"hesays,“onethingwhichIcannotexplain:howsheproducedandstoppedatwill thevariousrapswhichwereheardatagreatdistanceallroundher,andalsothestrangesoundslike the tinkling of a small electrical machine. But with this manifestation isexhaustedeverythinginherphenomenawhichIamunabletoexplain....ThatMadame’ssofthands,withtheirsupplepointedringers,wereverycleverintheexecutionofrapidmovements,Ihavemanytimesperceived.Shehadprobablytakenlessonsinconjuringfromsomeprofessorofwhitemagic.”7ThetestimonyofOlcottinfavorofmultipliedwondersbythehandsofMadameBlavatskycanindeedbecited.Butherethepeculiarityofthewitnessnullifiestheworthoftheevidence.Hodgson foundhimsocredulousanduncritical, sodestituteofevenordinarypowersofobservation,thathefeltcompelledtotreathistestimonyaspracticallyworthless ; andMadameBlavatskyherselfwas free to speakof theweaknessofOlcott,andevenstyledhim“apsychologizedbaby.”8

TheallegedcommunicationsoftheMahatmasthroughW.Q.Judgearequiteunworthy of any serious consideration. Paltry in matter, subordinated to thepersonal interestsofJudge,andproducedunderconditions that innowisecallforthesuppositionthatanythingmorethancommonmundaneagencywasbackofthem,theymustberatedbyanunprejudicedmindasmanifestfictions.Olcottattached to themthischaracter,andMrs.Besantwasconvinced that theywerewrittenbyJudge, thoughsheadmittedforprudential reasons thathemayhavegottensuggestionsfromtheMahatmas.9

SotheTheosophicalclaimrespectingtheexistenceandagencyofMahatmasisshadowedbysubstantialproofoffraudulentpretenseonthepartofitsleadingexponents.

46

3.TheosophyWasDrawnFromModernWritings,nottheMahatmas.

Thesupposition that theMahatmas,asahighorderof intelligences,wereaprincipal factor in the composition of the standard treatises of Theosophy isdisprovedbyplaincontradictionsintheteachingsofthosetreatises,byabundantevidence that their materials were drawn mostly from comparatively modernwritings,andbypeculiaritiesintheirstyle.

Intheprecedingchapternotewastakenoftwoglaringcontradictionsintheteaching of Madame Blavatsky – namely, those relating to the number ofcomponents inmanand to thedoctrineof reincarnation.Howhappened it thatthe guardian Mahatmas, who are represented as virtually the authors of thetreatises in which the contradictions occur, permitted their instruments to penstatements so diametrically opposed to one another? Plainly we have a tokenhereofthemythicalcharacterofthesebeings.

ThatthesupervisoryfunctionoftheMahatmaswasverymuchofanullityisalsoindicatedbythepalpableerrorsandplagiarismsdiscoverableinthestandardtreatises.Referring toIsisUnveiledawell-furnishedcriticremarks:“Thebookcontains innumerable errors,manyof themof themost rudimentary type.ThecommonestSanskritwordsaremisspelt;theBuddhistdoctrineoftransmigrationisgrosslymisrepresented;andtheBhagavadgitaisconfusedwiththeBhagavataPurana.”10On the sources fromwhichMadameBlavatskydrewhermaterials,mostly without acknowledgment, W. E. Coleman, who seems to haveinvestigated the subject to the very foundations, makes illuminating remarks.“The books utilized in compiling Isis,” he says, “were nearly all currentnineteenth-century literature. Only one of the old and rare books named andquoted from was in Madame Blavatsky’s possession – Henry More’sImmortalityoftheSoul,publishedintheseventeenthcentury.Oneortwoothersdatedfromtheearlypartofthepresentcentury;andalltherestpertainedtothemiddle and latter part of this century. Our author made great pretensions toCabbalisticlearning;buteveryquotationfromandeveryallusiontotheCabbala,in Isis and all her later works, were copied second-hand from certain bookscontaining scattered quotations from Cabbalistic writings. Not a line of thequotationsinIsisfromtheoldtimemystics,Paracelsus,VanHelmont,Cardan,Robert Fludd, Philalethes, Gaffarel, and others was taken from the originalworks; the whole of them are copied from other books containing scattered

47

quotationsfromthosewriters.ThesamethingoccurswithherquotationsfromJosephus,Philo,andtheChurchFathers.. . .TheSecretDoctrine,publishedin1888, isof apiecewith Isis. It ispermeatedwithplagiarisms, and is in all itspartsarehashofotherbooks.Twobooksverylargelyformthebasisofthiswork– Wilson’s translation of the Vishnu Purana and Professor Winchell’s WorldLife. The Secret Doctrine is saturated with Hinduism and with Sanskritterminology,andthebulkofthiswascopiedfromWilson’sVishnuPurana.”11

LetterspurportingtocomefromtheMahatmaKootHoomi,andpublishedinSinnett’s Occult World and Esoteric Buddhism, contained plagiarized matter.Oneofthem,withawell-nighincredibleaudacity,incorporatedalmostverbatimalongpassagefromarecentlydeliveredaddressofH.Kiddle,ofNewYork.12Referringtotheseletters,ascontainedinEsotericBuddhism,Colemanwrites:“Ifind in themoverwhelmingevidence thatallof themwerewrittenbyMadameBlavatsky. … I have traced to its source each quotation from the Buddhistscriptures in the letters, and they were all copied from current Englishtranslations,includingeventhenotesandexplanationsoftheEnglishtranslators....ThewriteroftheseletterswasanignoramusinSanskritandTibetan;andthemistakesandblundersinthem,intheselanguages,areinexactaccordancewiththeknownignoranceofMadameBlavatskythere-anent.EsotericBuddhism,likeall of Madame Blavatsky’s works, was based upon wholesale plagiarism andignorance.”13

WhatfurtherdemonstrationcouldbedesiredthattheMahatmas,asasuperiororder of intelligences, had nothing to do with the production of the standardwritings of Theosophy? These loose, inaccurate, plagiarizing compilations arefullyaccountedforentirelyapartfromanyreferencetotranscendentauxiliaries.Nodoubttheyexhibitaconsiderableamountofingenuityandacumen;butthatmuchcanbecreditedtoMadameBlavatskytogetherwithnomeancapacityforindustriousapplication.

4.Tibetnotevidenceofexceptionallyendowedinstructors

TheenlargementofacquaintancewithTibetinrecentyearsstronglyconfirmsthemythicalcharacteroftheMahatmas,whoarereputedtohavemadethatlandtheir headquarters and tohavegathered there all-comprehending libraries.The

48

religionofthecountrygivesnoevidencethatthepeoplewerefavoredwiththepresenceofexceptionallyendowedinstructors.

“PrimitiveLamaism,”saysWaddell,“maybedefinedasapriestlymixtureofSivaite mysticism, magic, and IndoTibetan demonolatry, overlaid by a thinvarnishofMahayanaBuddhism.And to thepresentdayLamaismstill retainsthis character.”14 “The Lamas,” asWaddell also states on the basis of ampledirectinvestigation,“donotknowanythingaboutthosespiritualmediums–theMahatmas–whichtheTheosophistsplaceinTibet,andgiveanimportantplaceinLamaistmysticism.ThemysticismoftheLamasisacharlatanismofameannecromanticorder.”15

ThetestimonyofotherrecentexplorersisfullyinlinewiththatofWaddell.AsFarquharsays:“TheBritishexpeditionsentbyLordCurzonactuallywenttoLhassa, so that Tibet is now well known. Two of the most honored Hinduscholars in Calcutta have wandered all over the hills within British territory,visiting monasteries and libraries. They have brought many manuscripts bothSanskrit and Tibetan to Calcutta. How is it that there is not a scrap ofcorroborationofMadameBlavatsky’swonderfulstory?NooneknowsanythingoftheexistenceoftheMasters,theirlodge,orthelibraries.”16

When Madame Blavatsky wrote, Tibet was a land of mystery, and shenaturallyfeltsafeinlocatingherwonderfulco-partners,withtheirunparalleledliteraryaccumulations, in thatcountry.Buthistoryhasunkindly lifted theveil,andthefavoriteretreatoftheMahatmasisfoundtobeasemptyofalltokensoftheirpresenceasisanyotherregion.

5.WherearetheBenefitsoftheSupposedMahatmas?

Theosophic teaching respecting the measureless stretch of the wisdom, orsecret traditional knowledge, possessed by the Mahatmas, is burdened withincredible implications. These perfected men, it is claimed, have, as a body,known for ages all that isworthknowing.All along theAlpha andOmegaofuniversalsciencehavebeentheirsecureproperty.Howhappensitthattheworldhasreceivednodiscoverablebenefitfromtheirmarvelousequipment?Whyhavetheydonenothingtohealthemanifoldwoesofmankind?Anordinaryscientist,who has discovered an effective remedy for a destructive disease or plaguewouldberatedassomewhatofamonstrosityifheshouldmakeasecretofhisdiscovery. How, then, have these mighty Masters managed so to hide their

49

knowledge that no practical benefit should accrue from it to a sufferinghumanity?Theonecredibleansweristhattheyhavedonenothingbecausetheyhave no existence outside of Theosophical imagination. In so called esotericsystemsgenerallypretenseislikelygreatlytooverlapreality.ThedistinctionoftheesotericwisdomoftheMahatmasisthatitseemstobewhollyapretense.

6.SkepticismofTheosophists

TheskepticismwhichTheosophistshaveappliedtospiritualisticphenomenamightwithentireproprietybeapplied toreputedapparitionsandperformancesof theMahatmas. If the spiritualisticmediums, instead of transactingwith thereal personalities of the dead, are deceived by a miserable astral shell, whatguarantee is there that Theosophists, in so far as they actually supposethemselvestohaveconversewithMahatmas,arenottrickedbysomewretchedcounterfeit of the noble personalities imagined to be making visitations?Doubtlesstheastralshellisasimaginaryasanythingelse;butifathingofthatkind can be thrown up to the Spiritualist, there is no apparent reason whysomethingequivalentmaynotbethrownuptotheTheosophist.Asasourceofauthentic information John King in no wise needs to be placed below theMahatmasKootHoomi andMoryawho superseded him in the recognition ofMadameBlavatsky.

TheTheosophicalbasisofauthorityisacongenialsubjectforsatire.Butwehave no inclination to resort to that expedient.We content ourselveswith thesoberinductionthattheclaimrespectingtheexistenceandagencyofMahatmasisquiteasdestituteoffoundationasisanyfictionthatwaseverpromulgated.

1. LettertothePallMallGazette,April26,1884,citedbyLillie,MadameBlavatskyandHerTheosophy,p.16.↩

2. In Light, October 11, 1884, cited by Leaf in Solovyoff’s ModernPriestessofIsis,pp.228,229.↩

3. For the citations see Solovyoff, A Modern Priestess of Isis, pp. 228-265.↩

4. Farquhar,ModernReligiousMovementsinIndia,p.239.↩5. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, Vol. III. pp. 201-

400.↩

50

6. ProceedingsoftheSocietyforPsychicalResearch,Vol.IX.p.146.↩7. AModernPriestessofIsis,pp.146ff.,209,210.↩8. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, Vol. III. pp. 210,

311.↩9. SeeinparticularGarrett,IsisVeryMuchUnveiled.↩10. Farquhar,ModernReligiousMovementsinIndia,p.225.↩11. CitedinSolovyoff’sAModernPriestessofIsis,Appendix.↩12. Farquhar,ModernReligiousMovementsinIndia,pp.231,232↩13. CitedinSolovyoff’sbook,pp.363,364.↩14. TheBuddhismofTibetorLamaism,1895,p.30.↩15. TheBuddhismofTibet,pp.128,129.↩16. ModernReligiousMovementsinIndia,pp.447,448.↩

51

Chapter9.CommentsOnProminentFeaturesOfTheTheosophicalSystem

Mrs.Besanthasbeenquotedassaying:“IftherearenoMasters,thentheTheosophicalSocietyisanabsurdity.”ThattherearenoMastersinhersense we think has been shown with a fair degree of conclusiveness in thepreceding chapter. The inference follows then, on the admitted basis, that anyfurtherconsiderationoftheclaimsofTheosophycanfitlybespared.Itmaynotbe, however, quite superfluous to indicate in a very brief and summary waysomeoftheweaknessesandincredibilitiesoftheTheosophicalsystem.

Oneof themostobviousexposures tocriticism,on thepartof that system,lies in its emphatic preference for antique mythology and its wholesaleappropriation of the dreams and fancies which have gained record in thatdomain.Theprimacyaccordedtothemoonovertheearthisonlyamorestrikinginstanceofthisabnormalpreference.Whatbutthefactthatinantiquefancythemoonwasmadetheseatofadeityvyinginpracticalimportancewiththesun-god,furnishedthebasisoftheTheosophicalthesisthatthemoonistheparentoftheearth,and thesource inperpetuityof lifepotencieswhichworkeffectuallyuponthelatter?Theverdictofscienceonthissubjectisthrowncontemptuouslyaside because it conflicts with mythological lore. This may be a maximuminstance,butitisnotalittletypical.TothismythologicalbasisTheosophyaddsa scholastic, formulating bent and an intemperate borrowing from Hinduspeculations.

Now, thesespeculations,bywhateverdegreeofsubtletysomeof themmaybe characterized, are verymuch in need of a title to legitimacy. Accordingly,evenifwesupposetheTheosophicalversionof themtobecorrect,wearenotabletodiscoverforTheosophyanysubstantialground.Itrestsonmythologicalfancies and certain adventurous speculations of Oriental minds. Of realverificationofitspretentioussystemitaffordsnotashred.

As an outcome of its infatuated preference for antique mythology andOrientalspeculation,TheosophygravitatesintoanunfairtreatmentoftheBible.Ashasbeennoticed,notallofitsrepresentativestransgressinequalmeasurein

52

thismatter,butingeneraltheytransgress,andthemostauthoritativeofallinthehighest degree. It is simply venom, reckless of all truth and sobriety, whichMadame Blavatsky shows when she speaks of the Israelitish Scriptures as arelatively degraded version of the Wisdom-Religion, and declares that thePentateuchfrombeginningtoendisanapotheosisofphallicism.

AsecondgroundforcriticismofTheosophyisitscharacteristicpredilectionfor the occult and the magical. It was generated in the atmosphere ofspiritualisticphenomena.Thecommunicationsassumed tobederived from theMahatmaswerebutarefinementonthemessagestransmittedthroughmediums,and fulfilled a like office in gratifying an appetite for the marvelous. ThescathingexposurewhichfollowedtheinvestigationoftheSocietyforPsychicalResearchabridgednotalittlethedispositiontoexploitthefavoritephenomena,but it did not eliminate the predilection for the occult and the magical.Mrs.Besant gave a token that thegivenpredilectionwas still operative in thetrend of her thinkingwhen she justified the continued and general use of theLatinlanguageintheservicesofthechurchonthegroundthattheLatinwordsarespeciallyefficacioustosetupcertainordersofvibrationsthatareneededintheinvisibleworlds.1Togivesuchprominence to themagical isequivalent,ofcourse,toarelativeretrenchmentoftheprimacyoftherationalandthemoral.

Theosophyisfurthermoresubjecttochallengeonthescoreofcontradictionsthatreachtothesubstanceofteaching.Inenumeratingconspicuousinstancesofthesewerepeatinpartwhathasalreadybeensaid.ItwasnoticedthatMadameBlavatskyinaworkassumedtohavebeenwrittenunderthesupervisionoftheMahatmas made man’s nature trinal rather than septenary, and pronouncedreincarnationathoroughlyexceptionalexperience,whereasinherlaterteaching,asinthatofherco-partners,nothingismorecharacteristicthantheassumptionofman’sseptenarynatureanddestinationtoaprolongedseriesofincarnations.Another contradiction appears in the exaltation of Theosophy as the effectivesafeguard against materialism, while yet in its general theory of being itcompromisestheprimacyofspiritovermatter,andinitspsychologyindulgesinmultipliedrepresentationsthatviewiththemostultramaterialisticpropositionsthatwere ever formulated.A further contradiction is seen in the doctrine of arelationlessAbsolutecoupledwiththedeclarationthatallthatisemanatesfromtheAbsolute,itbeingquiteapparentthatthisdeclarationputstheAbsoluteintherelation of source to product. Still another contradiction meets us in theassumptionoftheinvincibleunchangingworkingofimpersonallaw,takeninits

53

utter contrast with the assumption that no pain, sorrow, or distress can reachthosewhohaveenteredintoDevachan.

Now, thesubjectsofDevachanarepicturedasso loadeddownwithunpaidobligations,sosoiledbythetransgressionscommittedinpreviouslives,thattheymustundergorepeatedincarnationsinordertopayofftheirscoreandbepurgedfrom their stains.What, then, secures that in Devachan they enjoy unalloyedblissandareinaccessibletoanygroundoroccasionofdisquietude?Plainly,thisresult presumes upon a suspension of the irreversible irresistible law ofretribution, and opens the door to postulating the intervention of the personalagencytowhichthatlawisunderstoodnottobeamenable.Mrs.Besantvirtuallyconfesses asmuchwhen she ascribes themarvelous immunity from sufferingenjoyed by the denizens ofDevachan to “the great spiritual intelligenceswhosuperintendhumanevolution.”2ThisisequivalenttosayingthatpersonalagencyannulstheoperationofKarmaorimpersonallawforlongperiodsinthecareerof every individual. Contradictions, like these, touching not superficial butfundamental matters, leave the Theosophical claim to authority in anexceedinglybadplight.

Averyseriousobjection liesagainstTheosophy insofaras it isablendofpantheismandpolytheism.Ashasbeen indicated, it isavowedlyand radicallypantheistic. The ascription of personality to God it denounces as a belittlinganthropomorphism.InthisviewMadameBlavatskystigmatizestheGodof themonotheistic religions as a blasphemous caricature. Her assumption is thatsuitable greatness can be attributed toDeity only bymaking him impersonal.Thatassumptionisnotunusualwithpantheists.Itisquitedestitute,however,ofsubstantial basis. The endowments of personality – self-consciousness,intelligence,will, and ethical attributes – are the highest that the humanmindcanconceive.TocarrytheseuptoaninfiniteorperfectscaleandascribethemtoGodistodignifythethoughtofhimtotheutmost.Torobhimofthem,andtopredicate impersonality in the interest of his greatness, is a self-defeatingprocedure.InevitablytheGoddespoiledofthehighestknowncategories,insteadof being raised to the supra-personal, is thrust down to the plane of the infra-personal.

AsrespectsthepolytheisticphasewhichTheosophistshaveincorporatedintotheirsystem,asufficientaccountforourpurposehasbeengivenintheprecedingpages.We only remark here on its singular barrenness. The subordinate godswhom they recognize are distant and ghostly figures wholly destitute of anypower of appeal. They may afford some compensation for the awful blank

54

resulting from the assumption of an impersonal Deity with whom a vitalcommunionisoutofquestion;butthattheycansatisfytheyearningsofnormalhumanbeingsinanyconsiderabledegreestrikesusasquiteinconceivable.

In its cosmology and anthropology Theosophy is chargeable with runninginto a fantastic and gratuitous complexity. No other description befits itsassumptionthattheearthisoneinachainofsevenplanetsthemostofwhichareperpetually invisible, and that the solar system contains seven such chains. Inlikemannernootherdescriptionbefitstheassumptionthataplanetaryorbistheseat of seven races, each of which contains seven subdivisions, and eachsubdivisionsevenbranchraces,througheachofwhichthehumansubjectmustpassonhisfatedpilgrimage.Withequaljusticethegivendescriptionappliestothe doctrine that man is made up of seven constituents, several of which aresubjected to progressive dissipation between incarnations, the astral body, forinstance, being described as seven concentric rings which are evaporated oneafteranother,untilthemindbodyisreachedandconsignedtoasimilarprocess.Theschemeissoextravagantlycomplexthatitisalittledifficulttoimaginewhyitwasconcocted.Verylikelytheideaofthespecialsignificanceofthenumberseven supplied the initial spur to theconstruction.That it canbeaccountedasanybetterthanamerewhimsynoonecanbelievewhoisnotreadytoacceptthetheory of authoritative communications fromMahatmas; and to resort to thatbasisofbeliefwouldbelikeacceptingoneincredibilityonthegroundofastillgreaterincredibility.

It remains to comment on the Theosophical doctrine of reincarnation. Thebasisforthedoctrineinanyformisexceedinglytenuous.Theclaimofisolatedindividuals to have some recollection of a former life is not adapted to carryconviction in face of the substantially universal lack of any such recollection.Instancesofinfantprecocitymaybeexplainedbysomepeculiarityofthebrainor of the sense organs or of the two in combination, and a like explanationapplies toexamplesofahighorderofgenius in themature. Inequalities in lotmay be attributed to the working of a general system of law upon unequalconditions;andinanycasethejudgmentthatthosewhosufferinlargemeasuremayberecompensedfurtheronisdecidedlymoreeligiblethantheharshverdictthat their sufferings are proof positive that they are specially ill-deserving andare only reaping what they have sown in a previous incarnation. Everyexperienced and reflecting person knows of concrete instances where theapplicationofsuchaverdictseemsnothingbetterthaninhumanandslanderousaccusation.

55

Evenifadegreeoftolerancecouldbeaccordedtothetheoryofreincarnation,it bynomeans follows that it could be approved in themode andmeasure inwhich it is taught by Theosophy. Taken in the sense of Madame Blavatsky,Mrs.Besant, Judge,Sinnett,andothers, it isan incredible theory.Ashasbeennoticed, it assumes that thenumberofhumansoulsormonadswas fixedagesago, and so collides with the well-grounded induction as to the progressiveincrease of the population. Again, it presumes upon an economy singularlywastefulandabortiveinitsveryconditions.Since,asarule,thehumansubjectretainsnorecollectionofpreviousincarnations,heisrobbedoftheopportunityto learnbyexperience, and is sentblindfolded througha successionof roundsthat is staggering to the imagination to contemplate. Plainly, to accept theexistenceofsuchaneconomyistoexcludethebeliefthatwisdomcontrolstheuniverse.OncemoretheTheosophicaltheoryinvolvesanelementofunfoundedoptimism.Whyshoulditbeassumedthattheblindfoldedpilgrimwillsoonerorlater reach Nirvana? Unwarned and unguided by a knowledge of his pastexperience,heisevidentlyexposedtotheliabilityofaddingerrortoerror,andsoofincreasingwitheachnewincarnationthesumofanadversekarma.IfinnocaseamancontinuouslytravelsintheoppositedirectionfromNirvana,itmustbebecauseagraciouspersonalagencyintervenesinhisbehalf.ButtoadmitthisinterventioniscontradictorytotheTheosophicmaximontheremorselessruleofimpersonallaw.

AdegreeofcredithassometimesbeenaccordedtoTheosophyasfosteringamore sympathetic attitude toward the ethnic religions than was formerlymaintained by evangelical Christianity.Were substantial proof afforded of thealleged fact, we should be glad to award to the pretentious cult thismuch ofcredit.Itisourconviction,however,thatthemoresympatheticattitudeistobeattributedtoabroaderandmorediligentstudyoftheethnicsystems,andisduein very slight degree, if at all, to Theosophy. Themost that it can claimwithgoodwarrant is tohavegiven forth, at second-hand, someof the truthsof theworld’s leadingreligions.Unhappily, ithasovertoppedthese truthsbycolossalerrorsandfictions.

1. EsotericChristianity,p.337.↩2. TheAncientWisdom,pp.137,138.↩

56

PartII–NewThought

57

Chapter1.GeneralSketch

While the New Thought movement is not without pronouncedcharacteristics, it has no one oracle or textbook, and is not strictlyuniformintoneandcontent.TheperiodwhichithascoveredissubstantiallythesameasthatofChristianSciencesocalled.Oneoftheprominentsourcesofthelatterwasalsoasourceoftheformer.InspiteofthedenialsofMrs.Eddy,itis historically demonstrated that she was greatly indebted to P. P. Quimby ofPortland,Maine, forher religio-medical scheme.The samegenial exponentofmentalhealingwasoneof theeffectiveantecedentsofNewThought.Thishasbeen acknowledged in these terms by a leading representative: “The NewThought movement had as its first great apostle P. P. Quimby, of Portland,Maine,andlaterJuliusA.Dresser,ofBoston,andDr.W.F.Evans.Dr.Dressertaught and practiced mental healing, and wrote but little. Dr. Evans wrote anumberofbooks,themostimportantbeing‘PrimitiveMindCure’and‘EsotericChristianity,’1 Though deriving its initial impulse from Quimby, the NewThought movement has probably drawn quite as largely from Ralph WaldoEmersonas fromhim.Emerson’spagesarequiteoftencitedbyNewThoughtwriters,andoneofthemdescribeshimas”thegreatestintuitivemindofmoderntimes,whoinstinctivelysawandfelttheonenessandinterrelationofallthings."2AthirdantecedenthassometimesbeenspecifiedasHinduthinking.Thismuchatleastisclear:somestrainsinthesystemunderreviewareanalogoustocertainphases ofHindu speculation, though it is to be observed that any such formalexaltationofHinduphilosophyand theologyas is characteristicofTheosophydoesnotappearinNewThoughtliterature.

Amongconspicuousrepresentatives in recentyearsHoratioW.Dresser,sonofJuliusA.Dresser,maybenumbered.Butitisnecessarytoaddaqualification.Insomeofhisbooks,especiallythelatest,heappearsquiteasmuchthecriticasthe advocate of New Thought. Among thoroughgoing advocates we haveCharlesB.Patterson,HenryWood,RalphW.Trine,CharlesB.Newcomb,andAbelL.Allen.

58

A very natural inquiry concerns the attitude of these writers toward themodern cults which have been so ambitiously advertising themselves. AsrespectsChristian Science they confess, that it bears a certain kinship to theirownsystem.Thisappliesinparticulartosuchconceptionsasunityofbeingandthepowerofmindoverbodilyconditions.Ontheotherhandtheyprotestagainstthe despotic concentrationof authority characteristic ofChristianScience, andtakeexception,whetherwithentireconsistencyornot,toitssweepingnegationof matter, sickness, sin, and death. One of their number states the points ofcomparisonasfollows:

“Christian Science and theNewThought agree that all life is one; that allintelligence is one; that God is all in all. And they disagree on the followingpoints:ChristianSciencesays that thevisibleworld ismortalmind[that is,anillusion]; theNewThoughtdeclaresthevisibleuniversetobeanexpressionofGod’shandiwork.ChristianScienceassertsthatsin,sickness,anddeathhavenoexistence.TheNewThoughtaffirms that theyhaveanexistence;but that theirexistenceisonlylimitedandtheirdestructioncomesthroughrightthinkingandhencerightliving.ChristianSciencestandsforagreatsectarianorganization;itstands for slavery of the individual to an institution – at least at present. TheNew Thought stands for a knowledge of spiritual truth among all people andperfectfreedomoftheindividualinboththoughtandaction,toliveoutthelifeGodintendedhimtolive.ChristianSciencestandsforawomanandabook;theNewThoughtmovement stands forGodmanifesting through the soulofman,foreternallawsofcreation,andforabsolutefreedomoftheindividualtoworkout his own salvation.ChristianScience stands for a treatment of disease thatincludesbothanegativeandanaffirmativephilosophy;theNewThoughtinitstreatmentofdiseaserestsontheomnipotenceofGodastheoneandonlyhealingpowerintheuniverse,andisthereforethoroughlyandsolelyaffirmative.”3

RelativetomodernTheosophyverylittleissaidbyNewThoughtwriters.WenoticethatoneofthemappropriatestheTheosophicalnotionofanastralbody,andspeaksincomplimentarytermsofthecontributionmadebyTheosophytoanunderstanding of man’s complex nature.4 Somewhat of a leaning, as will beshown in the next chapter, to the doctrine of reincarnation, so prominent inTheosophy,isdiscoverableinNewThoughtliterature.

InrelationtoSpiritualismwefindoneexponentofNewThoughtindulgingintheappreciativeremarkthatithasaffordedindubitableevidenceofthecontinuedexistence of the human spirit after death.5 An adverse reference, on the other

59

hand, is contained in the judgment of another writer that mediumship, asinvolvinganunduesubjectionofonemindtoanother,isunwholesome.6

New Thought has, as we understand, no central organization, and incomparatively few cases has its constituency been gathered into distinctchurches.Intheattitudeassumedtowardthehistoricchurchessomedifferencesareobservable.ThemostirenicpositionthathasfallenunderournoticeisthattakenbyHenryWood.Hesays:“AfewofthosewhoclaimtobeexponentsofNewThoughthavebeenmoreorlesssevereintheirattacksuponconventionalinstitutions.ThisspirithasnogenuinewarrantanditdoesnotrepresenttheNewThought in itspurityandbreadth.Oneof itsbasicprinciples is tosee thebestside of everything.Whatever the fault of the formal creeds and doctrines, theidealsofthechurcharemainlyright.Itisnottobedestroyedorsuperseded,butspiritualized, purified, and illumined.”7 Passages as kindly in tone as this wejudge to be thoroughly exceptional. We find one writer making the baldstatement that the church of to-day stands as a barrier to all really advancedreligious,philosophic,andscientificthought.“Ithasbecomealifelessorganism,a dead body without any real or vital belief in its own teachings.”8 Anotherwriter scores ecclesiasticism – by which he doubtless means the historicChristianChurch–ashavingmadeforeighteencenturiesavainstruggle“basedupon a sterile and ascetic philosophy, with its grotesque idea of a supremegood.”9AthirdexponentoftheNewThoughtplatformcensuresthetheologiesof orthodox Protestantism andCatholicism as alike teaching dogmas that find“theironlysupportinthetheoryandsuppositionoftheseparationofGodfromman.” The same writer remarks on the increase of crime and insanity, thedepravity,poverty,disease,andwretchednesswhicheverywhereconfrontusattheopeningofthetwentiethcentury,andlaystheblameforthedismalsituationupon the churches, as having crippled men by their emphasis on humanweaknessanddependence.10Equallydisparagingstatementscouldbecitedfromothers.11On thewhole, theNewThoughtmovement, in every circlewhere itsucceedsinmakingitsinfluencefelt,mustfostertowardthehistoricchurchesanattitudeofself-satisfiedsuperiority,nottosayofdownrightaversionandradicaldisparagement.Itsmessageisvirtually,ifnotformally,“Comeoutfromamongthemandfindyourneedsmetinthenewreligionwhichisnowstartinguponitscourse.”

TheexpoundersofNewThoughthavemanifestedverylittleambitiontodealwith thespecificproblemsofbiblicalcriticism.Theirmethod is, ingeneral, totaketheBibleastheyfindit,andtoemploysuchportionsofitasareagreeable

60

to their postulates, ignoring or freely contradicting the rest. In their view theBibleisinnopreeminentsenseadivinerevelation.TheyseenoreasonwhyGodshouldnotbesupposedtohavespokenthroughEmersonandWaltWhitmanastrulyas throughMosesandPaul.Someof themwouldnothesitate to say thatamongthesacredbooksoftheworldtheBibleisthebest.Otherswouldprefertosaythatitisthebestforthosepeoplesoverwhosereligiousthoughtithasbeeninstalled, and reserve a place for doubting whether it is best for Buddhists,Hindus,Mohammedans,orConfucianists.Occasionallythejudgmentcropsoutthatthegroundsofchoicebetweenreligionsarenotatallsubstantial.Thusweread:“Thegreatfundamentalprinciplesofallreligionsarethesame.Theydifferonly in their minor details according to various degrees of unfoldment ofdifferentpeople.”12 It is to benoticed, however, that practicallyNewThoughtwriterspayspecialtributetotheChristianoracles,thenumberoftheircitationsfromothersacredbooksbeingcomparativelyinsignificant.

The conception of Christ characteristic of New Thought is purelyhumanitarian.Tobesure,entirereadinessisshowntoascribetohimdivinityordeity. But that form of description is not regarded as bespeaking for him anyexclusive distinction. He may be characterized as a God-man, but not as theGod-man. He may have been somewhat extraordinary in the clarity of hisrecognition of his oneness with God; in this, however, he simply put onexhibition thenormalman.There isnogroundwhatever forbelieving thathispersonalitydifferedfromthatofothermen.13Hestandsbeforeusasthemoralideal,andfulfillstheofficeofSaviourbyexample.Eveninhismiraclesheisnotapart from us. The so-calledmiracleswere perfectly conformable to law, andindicatethekindofequipmentanymanmightuseifhewouldbutenteruponhisfullinheritance.

In their teachingon thepractical conductof lifeNewThoughtwritersgiveexpression to many excellent maxims. The several virtues which may beregarded as constitutive of Christlikeness are strongly and repeatedlyemphasizedby them. Itmaybequestioned, indeed,whether thepoint ofviewfromwhichtheemphasisproceedsisalwaysthebest,butthatafullmeasureofemphasis is awarded no reader can fail to discover. Love, charitableness,gentleness,patience>spiritualmindedness,togetherwiththeavoidanceofenvy,jealousy,hatred,andeveryformofunbrotherlyconductareworthilyinculcated.Ofcourse,itisnotatallnecessarytogototheNewThoughtliteraturetomeetearnest commendationsof theChristlikevirtues.Still, the industrywithwhichthese virtues are insisted upon in that literature calls for appreciation. As

61

examples of finely expressedmaxims we subjoin the following: “Love is thegreatestsuccessintheworld.”

“Theultimateendoflifeistolove,nottobeloved,althoughthatfollowsasanaturalsequence.”“Loveistheeternalsunshineoflife,andtoonelivinginthatsunshine there can be no darkness.” “Love seeks nothing for itself but theopportunityofexpression.”“Tothinknoevilissimplytohavenoownershipofit.”“Thoughthelawofnonresistanceislookeduponasweakandimpracticable,itisdivineandconquers,”“Obstinacyisthemarkofaweakwill.Itassertsitselfinanemphaticandabnormalwaybecausedistrustfulofitspower.”“Amancanneverbereallyfreewhoallowshimselftobecomeattachedtoorcontrolledbyhis possessions.” “The only infidelity is the worship of the golden calf, thereverenceforthingsmaterialratherthanthingsspiritual.”

“Tobecome an instrument of theSpirit onemust eliminate all sarcasm, allunrighteous judgment, all exclusiveness and pettiness, by cultivating themostgenerous attitude.” “Peace is not a stagnant pool; it is a deep flowing river.”“Absoluteconfidenceintheeternalwisdom,love,andpoweroflifeisnecessarytoclearseeingandrightdoing.”14MaximssuchastheseweregardasthelargestfactoronthecreditsideofNewThought.

1. C.B.Patterson,TheWilltoBeWell,p.10.↩2. HenryWood,StudiesintheThoughtWorld,p.201.↩3. Patterson,TheWilltoBeWell,pp.16,17.↩4. Newcomb,PrinciplesofPsychicPhilosophy,pp.45-50.↩5. Newcomb,All’sRightwiththeWorld,p.202.↩6. Patterson,IntheSunlightofHealth,pp.304,305.↩7. TheNewThoughtSimplified,pp.133,134.↩8. Patterson,IntheSunlightofHealth,p.28.↩9. Newcomb,All’sRightwiththeWorld,p.215.↩10. Allen,TheMessageofNewThought,pp.30,180ff.↩11. SeeinparticularTrine,TheNewAlinementofLife.↩12. Trine,InTunewiththeInfinite,p.208.↩13. Patterson,TheWilltoBeWell,pp.81,82.↩

62

14. ThecitationsarefromDresser,Patterson,Wood,andNewcomb.↩

63

Chapter2.TheDoctrineOfMan

Wedonot find thatclosediscriminationof thefactorswhichenterintoman’sbeingisspeciallycharacteristicofNewThoughtliterature.Thewriterwhosepublications areperhaps themost numerous specifies as thecomponentsoftheindividualthesethree,namely,soulorspirit,mindandbody.Hedefinesmindastheexpressionofsoulorspirit,andbodyastheexpressionofmind.1Asrespects thegraspof thehigherverities,hedisparages theabilityofthemental factor.“Mind,”hesays,“canneverapprehendGod.Wecan reasonand think about spirit, but we can really know it only through spiritual, notmentalactivity.”2Aformalexpressionofthetrichotomisttheory,inthisstyle,israrely indulged inbyNewThoughtwriters.Theemphasiswith them isnot somuchupon themindbeing theexpressionof thespiritasupon thebodybeingtheexpressionofthemind.Inthislatterstatementtheintentionseemstobenotsomuchtogiveaprecisedefinitionofthebodyastostressitsdependenceuponthemindasitsformativeprinciple.Justhowthebody,orthematerialworldingeneral,istobeconstruedisleftsomewhatinthemist.ThestrongpredilectionofNewThoughtformonism,ortheassumptionofthethoroughgoingonenessofall being, stands in the way of making any positive antithesis, in respect ofessence, betweenmatter andmind or spirit. On the other hand, to distinguishbetweenthemisfoundtobeexceedinglyconvenientinvariousconnections.Sothe temptation not to elucidate the subject too searchingly is operative. Onewriter, resorting to a standard found in Theosophical literature, makes thedistinctionbetweenmindandmattertolieintherateofvibration.“Matter,”hesays,“ismindataslowerrateofvibration.Mindismatteratahigherrate.Spiritisinfinitelymorerapidthaneitherandrulesboth.”3Howspiritormind,equallywith body, can be a subject for vibration the context does not inform us. Thelanguage employed tends not so much to spiritualize matter as to materializemind and spirit. recurring distinction is met with in New Thought literaturebetweentheconsciousandthesubconsciousmind.Muchaccountismadeofthelatter. It is likened to“agreatcovered reservoir inwhich is storedup the totalaggregation of pastmental states and activities.”4Again it is described as the

64

hiddenpartnerwhichactsautomaticallyuponthephysicalorganism,andsubtlydirects all that class of activities which is called involuntary.“5 Morediscriminatinglyitisdefinedasalessconsciousphaseofasingleselfhood,toocopious to be wholly displayed at one time.”6 How important a factor it issupposedtobeamongtheforceswhichshapeconductappearsinthisstatement:

“Perhapsthelargestpartofourexperienceisinthefieldofthesubconscious.Atraitorpurposeisdevelopedtherelongbeforeitappearsabovethehorizonofourperception.Longafterwehavedeniedahabitoropinionit isapt to lingerthereandcolorandactuateourlife.”7

TheimmenseemphasiswhichNewThoughtplacesupontheinterconnectionofallbeingsaffordsacongenialbasisforrecognizingthefactoftelepathy,ortheexistence of a power of direct communication between minds placed at adistance from one another. Not all New Thought exponents have concernedthemselveswith the subject;but someof themhave renderedaveryconfidentjudgmentinfavoroftherealityoftelepathy.ThusC.B.Newcombremarks:“Itisascientificfactwhichisbeingconstantlydemonstratedthroughtelepathythatmindcanconsciouslyconversewithmind.”8“Thoughtwavesappear tospreadandwiden in theirvibrationsverymuchas thoseof soundand light.Theyarealsointensifiedintheirpowerbybeingbroughttoafocus,asarethesunraysbyaburningglass.”Headds:“Experimentinthisfieldhasbeensolimitedthatasyet we have reached only a few definite conclusions. It appears that theconditionswhichhaveproducedthemostsatisfactoryresultsatonetimearebyno means certain to produce the same results at another.”9 A. B. Olstonpronounceswithlikedecisionforthefactoftelepathy,andcitesmanyinstancesinconfirmation.Inhisviewitisinparticularthesubconscious,or,ashenamesit, the subjective mind, that is operative in this order of communication.Accordingly, he defines telepathy as “the normal communication betweensubjectiveminds,independentofthefiveobjectivesenses.”10

Notlessthantelepathythedoctrineofreincarnation,orrepeatedincarnations,has a congenial basis in points of view characteristic of New Thought. Italleviates the difficultywhich apart from itwould attach to the thesis, that allphysical ills have their origin inmental errancyormisdirected thought.Whilenotenumeratedinthelistofacknowledgedtenets,itcropsouthereandthere,asappearsinthefollowingsentences:“Thislittleearthlifeisnotthebeginningnorthe end of man’s destiny.”11 “Children in this life without doubt are beingrewardedorpunishedforthingsdoneorleftundoneinapastlife.”12

65

“Themillsofthegodsgrindsoslowlythatthegristofto-daymayhavebeenput into thehopper insomeincarnationfarremote,butdoubtlessbytheman’sown hands, for it is only our own grist that comes to us through the mill oflife.”13 “Why,” asks thewriter of the last sentence, “should the philosophy ofreembodiment which has always been held by the larger part of the world,includingitsmostdistinguishedminds,besodistastefultoafewwhohavenotuntilrecentlybeenmadefamiliarwithitsteachings?”14Ontheotherhand,H.W.Dresserratesthedoctrineofreincarnationasonlyanhypothesis,andconfessesthat he has found but little evidence in its favor.15 It is characteristic of theliterature with which we are dealing to emphasize profoundly the power ofthought among the elements of man’s equipment. Its virtue is accountedpracticallyunlimited.IllustrativestatementsnaturallywillbeinspecialdemandwhenwecometothehealingartofNewThought;butafewsamplesoftheever-recurringstrainmaybeadmittedatthispoint.“Thought,”weread,“isnotonlythegreatestbuttheonlyrealpowerintheuniverse.”16

“Willisnot,assooftenthought,aforceinitself;willisthedirectingpower.Thought is the force.”17 In proportion as a man opens himself to the divineinfluxhe takeson theGod-powers. “And if theGod-powersarewithout limit,does itnot then follow that theonly limitationsmanhasare the limitationshesetshimselfbyvirtueofnotknowinghimself?”18“Theartoflivingistheartofthinking,forlifehasnovaluesexceptasthoughtmoldsthem....Rightthoughtmeansrightliving.”19

“Thepersonalbody isaphysical copyof the individualmind,and in somepart of its construction expresses its every thought.”20 “The body is what themindmakesit.”21“Withscientificaccuracy,onecanmakehimselfwhathewillby thinking his thoughts into the right form, and continuing the process untilthey solidify and take outward correspondence.”22 “It is literally true thatthought can be materialized through trained and powerful concentration.”23“Thoughtsarelivingentities.”24

1. Patterson,TheWilltoBeWell,p.16.↩2. Patterson,TheMeasureofaMan,pp.xxiv,rxv.↩3. Newcomb,DiscoveryofaLostTrail,p.252.↩4. Wood,TheNewThoughtSimplified,p.43.↩5. Wood,TheNewThoughtSimplified,p.44.↩

66

6. Dresser,HumanEfficiency,p.121.↩7. Newcomb,All’sRightwiththeWorld,p.-149.↩8. PrinciplesofPsychicPhilosophy,p.194.↩9. All’sRightwiththeWorld,p.231.↩10. Olston,MindPower,p.57.↩11. Patterson,DominionandPower,p.139.↩12. Patterson,IntheSunlightofHealth,pp.146,147.↩13. Newcomb,DiscoveryofaLostTrail,pp.110,111.↩14. Newcomb,DiscoveryofaLostTrail,p.254.↩15. Dresser,TheSearchofaSoul,pp.175,176.↩16. Wood,StudiesintheThoughtWorld,p.235.↩17. Trine,WhatAlltheWorld’sA-Seeking,p.173.↩18. Trine,InTunewiththeInfinite,p.15.↩19. Allen,TheMessageofNewThought,pp.261,265.↩20. Whipple,MentalHealing,p.137.↩21. Patterson,WhatIsNewThought?p.32.↩22. Wood,TheNewThoughtSimplified,p.49.↩23. Newcomb,PrinciplesofPsychicPhilosophy,p.187.↩24. Newcomb,All’sRightwiththeWorld,p.107.↩

67

Chapter3.TheConceptionOfGodAndOfMan’sRelationToHim

The ruling conception of God in New Thought is that of theUniversal Life. He is also called the Universal Love and the UniversalIntelligence.Onthequestionwhetherpersonalityistobeascribedtohim,mostof the writers, if they do not enter a denial, show little interest to record anaffirmation. H. W. Dresser takes a somewhat exceptional course in raisingsafeguardsagainstapantheisticobscurationofdivinepersonality.HeisatpainstoassertthatGoddoesnotexhausthimselfinhisworldactivity,thatheisinasensetranscendentandastranscendentessentiallyunchangeable;thatthesonsofGod,whilenotseparatedfromhim,donotbecomeGod,anymorethanahumanfather absorbs his child.1Moreover, he advises against thinking of theDivinePresenceasimpersonal,2anddeclares,“Nomanwaseverapantheistinpracticallife.”3 On the other hand, he greatly emphasizes the intimacy of connectionbetweenGodandtheworld.Hespeaksoftheinfiniteas“madeperfectthroughthefinite.”4Heascribeseternitytotheworld,andadds,“Ifaworldofsomesorthasalwaysexisted,thereisnoneedofatheoryoffinalcauses.Teleologygivesplace todescription.Theconstitutionof theworld iswhat it isbecauseGodiswhatheis.”5Inanotherconnectionhemakesroomforteleologytotheextentofspeakingofthecosmosasrevealingpurpose.Hesays,however,“ThepurposeofGodistheeternalexpressionofthebeingofGod”6–aformofstatementwhichleavesusstilltoinquirewhetherGodhasanoptioninrespectoftheendswhichhepursues.

ThereferenceofotherNewThoughtadvocates to thepersonalityofGod isdistinctlymore negative and compromising in tone.One of themwrites: “Wemight say thatGod is all the personality in the universe andmuchmore thanpersonality. God is infinite love, limitless and supreme; but personality islimited.”7 Another remarks: “God is not less but incomparably more thanpersonal. InfiniteMind,Love,andLaware termswhichdoubtlesscarry to theaveragemindamorecorrectconceptoftheSupremeBeingthanpersonality.”8A

68

third exponent of New Thought is not at all disturbed by the charge ofpantheism, and contents himself with asking the question, “Is not a spiritualpantheismmoredesirablethananabsenteeGod?”9

Inconstruingman’srelation toGodNewThoughtwritersarenotcareful toavoidtheappearanceofapantheisticblendofthehumanandthedivine.EvenH.W. Dresser, in one of his books, speaks of the higher self in man as an“individuationofGod,”10andwithotherwritersitisawellestablishedhabittodesignatemanasapartofGod.Thefollowingarecharacteristicstatements:“Allmindsaresubstantiallypartsofoneomnipresentmind,whichisthebasisofallmanifestation.”11 “There isnodifferencebetween thegreatuniversalSoul andthe individual soul, other than this one thought of differentiation orindividualization.”12“Godisall;and,ifall,theneachindividual,youandI,mustbeavitalpartof that all, since therecanbenothing separate from it; and if apart,thenthesameinnature,incharacteristics–thesameasatumblerofwatertakenfromtheoceanis, innature,inqualities,incharacteristics,identicalwiththatocean,itssource.God,then,istheinfiniteSpiritofwhicheachoneisapartintheformofanindividualizedspirit.”13

Proceedingfromthispointofview,exponentsofNewThoughtareveryfreeto ascribe divinity toman. Instances occur inwhich the divine name is givenhim,divinefunctionsarepredicatedofhimandhisidentitywithGodisasgoodasaffirmed.The reader is told,“There isnoseparationbetweenyour soulandthe soul of the universe.… In the deepest sense you are the great universalsoul.”14 “Man is the personal expression of the one creative Spirit; so thatpurposefulevolution isamultiplyingof self-conscious,divinepersonalities.”15“Divine incarnations must be multiplied and perfected until God shall findadequate expression in humanity.”16 “Man is God incarnate.”17 “Cast thyselfintothewillofGodandthoushaltbecomeasGod.ForthouartGodifthywillbe thedivinewill.”18 “God isLove.God isLaw.WeareLaw.God andLove19”Wehavelatentwithinussuchpowersovermatter,aswehavebutjustbegunto dream. In the scheme of creationwe shall ourselves rank as creators,withability to disintegrate and reintegrate atwill such forms aswe shall choose tobringintovisibleexistence.“20”Wearealreadywarrantedinboldlyclaimingthatwehavenolimitationsexceptthosewehaveplaceduponourselves."21

Theseloftydescriptionsaremeanttobeappliednottotheexceptionalman,buttoeveryman;not,indeed,inalltheirspecificationstothepresentestateofevery man, but to the ultimate estate. New Thought has no tolerance for thesupposition that any human being can fail of the ideal consummation. It

69

repudiatesthenotionoflostsouls.22“Man,”weareinformed,“iseverpressingsteadfastly toward life, toward a knowledge of truth. All his sins and all hismistakes, when seen and understood in their right relation, have only beenstepping-stones to greater knowledge, to truer understanding.”23 “All passultimatelyoverthesameroadingeneral,somemorerapidly,somemoreslowly.Theultimatedestinyofallisthehigherlife,thefindingofthehigherself,andtothisweareeitherledorpushed.”24

The inclusion of man in God, the making him a veritable part of Deity,prepares a difficult situation for the champions of New Thought when theyaddressthemselvestothequestionoftherealityofsin,sickness,suffering,anddeath.ItissomewhatenigmaticthataveritablepartoftheperfectandHolyOneshouldbeasubjectforanyformofevil,andespeciallyofmoralevil.

IndealingwiththisdifficultyNewThoughtexpositorshavebeenpushedintoakindofapologyforevil,moraldelinquencyincluded.Theyareledtodefineitasameanstosomethinghigherthanitself,oraspurelynegative,orasalackofdevelopment, or as a partial expression of life, or as a product of ignorance.Their writings abound in such sentences as these: “The followers of the newdoctrinebelievethatultimatelyonlythegoodexists,allseemingwrongbeingameanstoanendhigherthanitself.”25

“When fully interpreted evil ceases to be evil, and becomes educationalexperience.”26“Justasdarknessistheabsenceofthelightofthesun,soevilistheabsenceoftheknowledgeofthelawofGod.”27“Whatwehavecalledevilproves to be only a negative condition – a transition state, an imperfectripening.”28 “Goodand evil aremerely comparative terms– labels, onemightsay,fordifferentdegreesofattainment.”29

“All wrong mental conditions – malice, hatred, envy, pride, jealousy,sensuality,andkindredemotions–areindicationsofalackofdevelopment.”30“Evilrepresentstheundevelopedorpartialexpressionoflife,”31“Selfishnessisat the root of all error, sin, and crime, and ignorance is at the basis of allselfishness.”32Occasionallythefeltdemandtomakeaslittleaspossibleofevildrivestheapologistintoanapparentdenialofitsexistence.Wehavenoticedonewriterinparticularwhosedenialsonthistheme,takenintheirverbalform,arequite as prominent as his affirmations, and to discover the method of thereconciliationofthetwoordersofstatementsisrathertaxing.Ontheonehand,he criticizes Christian Science for its negations, and declares, “If you say, ingoodfaith,thatthereisnosin,sickness,ordisease,youhavesimplysucceededinhypnotizingyourself intoanerroneousbelief.”33On theotherhand,he lays

70

downpropositionsthatmighthavebeenpennedbyMaryBakerG.Eddy.WhatstatementsinScienceandHealtharemoreradicallynegativethanthefollowing?–“Thereneverwasanyrealityinsin,disease,ordeath.”34

“Nothingisevilinandofitself.Evilistheresultofthefalseimaginingsweindulge in.”35 “The greatest lessonman has yet to learn is that all things aregood;thatevilisnothing;thatitseemstobe,butinrealityisnot.”36“Inrealitythereisneithersin,sickness,nordeath.God’slawcanneitherbebrokennorsetaside.”37SuchlanguageweregardasastrikingtestimonytotheexigencywhichisthrustuponNewThoughtbyitsfundamentaldoctrinethatmanisaveritablepartofGod.Startingfromsuchapremise,howcananyonewhohasanyrespectforGod,restrainhisdesire tominifyoreven toabrogate thefactofsin?MostNewThoughtwritersdonotproceed to the latter extreme,butobviously theirleadingpostulatesbringapressuretobearupontheminthatdirection.

1. ManandtheDivineOrder,pp.408,410,411.↩2. AMessagetotheWell,p.38.↩3. ManandtheDivineOrder,p.164.↩4. InSearchofaSoul,p.215.↩5. ManandtheDivineOrder,pp.399,401.↩6. ThePhilosophyoftheSpirit,pp.113,115.↩7. Patterson,TheMeasureofaMan,pp.142,143.↩8. Wood,StudiesintheThoughtWorld,p.183.↩9. Allen,TheMessageofNewThought,p.59.↩10. InSearchofaSoul,p.118.↩11. Wood,StudiesintheThoughtWorld,p.189.↩12. Patterson,TheWilltoBeWell,p.117.↩13. Trine,WhatAlltheWorld’sA-Seeking,p.137.↩14. Patterson,TheMeasureofaMan,p.123.↩15. Wood,StudiesintheThoughtWorld,p.28.↩16. Ibid.,p.226.↩

71

17. Trine,WhatAlltheWorld’sA-Seeking,p.122.↩18. Newcomb,PrinciplesofPsychicPhilosophy,p.139.↩19. RosicrucianaxiomcitedbyNewcomb,PrinciplesofPsychicPhilosophy

,p.181.↩20. Newcomb,DiscoveryofaLostTrail,p.255.↩21. Newcomb,PrinciplesofPsychicPhilosophy,p.134.↩22. Dresser,ManandtheDivineOrder,pp.141,385.↩23. Patterson,WhatIsNewThought?p.45.↩24. Trine,WhatAlltheWorld’sA-Seeking,p.143.↩25. Dresser,InSearchofaSoul,pp.225,226.↩26. Wood,TheNewThoughtSimplified,p.89.↩27. Patterson,DominionandPower,p.30.↩28. Newcomb,PrinciplesofPsychicPhilosophy,p.10.↩29. Patterson,TheMeasureofaMan,p.40.↩30. Patterson,TheWilltoBeWell,p.15.↩31. Patterson,DominionandPower,p.150.↩32. Trine,InTunewiththeInfinite,p.89.↩33. Patterson,TheWilltoBeWell,p.123.↩34. Patterson,IntheSunlightofHealth,p.152.↩35. Ibid.,p.254.↩36. Ibid.,p.433.↩37. DominionandPower,p.35.↩

72

Chapter4.TheTherapeuticScheme

Thevery tenuousholduponrealitywhich isascribed toeviland thelimitless efficacy which is assigned to thought serve as the foundation of thetherapeutic scheme which is so prominent a factor in New Thought. In itsdiagnosisofbodilyillstheyarereferredtojustonesource.Thatsourceismentalerrancy, perverse or misdirected thought and the abnormal feeling which itengenders.“Mentalhealing,”wearetoldbyonewriter,“hasfullydemonstratedthat the imaging faculty of man is responsible for all the ills from which hesuffers.Onedisease is nomore imaginary than another. . . .Our thoughts arefirst ideated, thenexpressedoutwardly.Theexpressionmustcorrespond to theinnerthought.Ifthisisinflamed,inflammationwillmakeitselffeltinthebody... . The many inflammatory diseases that come from poor circulation andpoisoned blood are simply expressions of inflamedmental conditions.”1 In anequivalentstrainanotherwriterassuresus:“Alldiseaseisintheemotionallife.Itisadisturbanceofthecirculationwhichproceedsfromthought.”2“Thefeversand distempers of the body only externalize those of the mind.”3 The samewriterdoesnotshuntodeclarethat“deathinanyformissuicide,”4andanotherwritermakesastatementscarcelylessarrestingwhenheinformsusthat“rags,tatters, and dust are always in the mind before being on the body.”5 Amongmentalaberrationsfearisspeciallyemphasizedasaprolificsourceofdiseases.

“Alldisease,”it isaffirmed,“resultsfromfear.”6 Inanswer to theobjectionthat childrenarenot responsible thinkers, theplea ismade that “theyare littlesensitivemirrors,inwhichsurroundingthoughtsandconditionsarereflectedandduplicated.”7

Asallbodilyillsflowfromerringmentalactivities,sohealthistheproductofnormalthinking;andasourthinkingissubjecttoourdirection,thereisnorealneed to be afflictedwith any sort of physical ailment. “Themind,” so run theNewThoughtmaxims,“canmakethebodywholeandstrong,or themindcanmakeitweakordiseased;theresultispurelyaquestionofmentalpoiseorlackofit.”8“Wemakeourbodieswhatwewilltomakethemwhenweobservethelawsoflife.Wemayrealizethissothoroughlythatwecanhaveourheavenhere

73

onearth.”9“Nomatterwhatancestraltraithasbeenreproduced,nomatterwhattaint in the blood has shown itself anew, it can be wholly overcome in anyindividuallife....Manishisowncreatorandcandominatewhathismindhasexpressed.”10

In the mental dealing with disease two expedients are available, that ofresoluteaffirmationofhealth,andthatofsereneacquiescenceintheailment.Wedonot discover that in the therapeutics ofNewThought the two are carefullydistinguished. The writer last cited proffers this advice: “Let usmake friendswith our adversities. Nothing else will so quickly disarm their power andneutralize their sting.”11 This is the method to employ against nervousprostration.“Letusbeginbyceasingtooppose–ceasingtofightour troubles,declaringtheirnonentity,whilewegiveeartothethoughtoftheeternalman–ourowntrueself.”12

Their zeal for mental healing makes the advocates of New Thoughtexceedingly sparing of appreciative reference to the ordinary type of medicalscience.Theycommonlymentionitonlyforcriticism.Wenotice,however,thatone of them makes these significant concessions: “Materia medica fits thepresentstageofman’sdevelopment.…Inthecategoryofacute,contagious,andrapid disorders, the physician is, and for some time to come will be,indispensable.”13“Untilthesubjectivequarantinehasbeenintelligentlyerectedthatwhichisobjectivecannotbeentirelydisregarded.”14

Inmanyofthecitationswhichhavebeengiventhenoteofoptimismhasbeenveryconspicuous.Nothing infact ismorestriking in theNewThoughtsystemthanitsunlimitedoptimism.Itabolishes–intheory–everyshadow,andleavesnotoneregrettobeentertainedbyanyhumanbeing.Theliteratureoftheworldmay safely be challenged, we think, to outbid such optimistic strains as thefollowing:“Allthingsworktogetherforgoodwhetherwecallthembythenameofgoodorevil.”15Thelawofbettermentrunsthrougheverything.

“Thereisnotapin-pointofpersonalexperiencewecandiscoverthathaseverbeenoutside itsaction.”16 “Christ couldnothave suffered forothers, knowingthegrandeuroftheirdestinyandthateverymomentofexistenceallthingsworktogether forgood toeveryone.”17 “True life isunutterablesweetness, inwhichall the shadowsofouryesterdaysarewoven into the soft tintsof themorningsunshine.”18

“Theworld is a garden of delights, a veritable Eden to thosewho are notblindanddeaf.”19“Theadventofthenewman,Nietzsche’ssuper-man,isnearathand,themanwhoshallenterintoauniversal,acosmicconsciousness,andlook

74

out on all life as a ruler, a king having dominion and power over all things,holdinginhisownhandsthekeysoflife.”20

“Itmaywellbethatthenexthundredyearsofhumanprogresswillshowmanasvictoroverdiseaseandpain,showhimmasterofhisownphysicalorganism.Crimeandpunishmentforcrimewillbethingsof thepast,andpovertyshouldbeunknown.”21

1. Patterson,IntheSunlightofHealth,pp.207,233.↩2. Newcomb,PrinciplesofPsychicPhilosophy,p.167.↩3. All’sRightWiththeWorld,p.237.↩4. Ibid.,p.187.↩5. Trine,InTunewiththeInfinite,p.33.↩6. Newcomb,PrinciplesofPsychicPhilosophy,p.130.↩7. Wood,StudiesintheNewThoughtWorld,p.131.↩8. Patterson,WhatIsNewThought?p.74.↩9. Patterson,TheWilltoBeWell,p.51.↩10. Newcomb,DiscoveryofaLostTrail,p.16.↩11. Ibid.,p.187.↩12. Newcomb,DiscoveryofaLostTrail,p.189.↩13. Wood,NewThoughtSimplified,pp.158,160.↩14. Wood,StudiesintheThoughtWorld,p.246.↩15. Patterson,DominionandPower,p.54.↩16. Newcomb,PrinciplesofPsychicPhilosophy,p.30.↩17. Newcomb,All’sRightwiththeWorld,p.56.↩18. Newcomb,DiscoverofaLostTrail,p.26.↩19. Newcomb,All’sRightwiththeWorld,p.32.↩20. Patterson,WhatIsNewThought?pp.144,143.↩21. Patterson,IntheSunlightofHealth,p.62.↩

75

Chapter5.SomeGroundsOfCriticism

Much less spacewill be required to pass upon themerits of NewThoughtthanhasbeengiventoanexpositionofitsteachings.Hereweareveryfarfromacceptingthejudgmentofitsadvocates.Inthefirstplace,wedonotfindthatitisatalldistinguishedbycloseandindustriousreasoning.Onthecontrary,itsmethodissuperficial,oracular,conclusiveonlytotheonewhoiseasilyoverawedbyassertionorisalreadyatthestartmorethanreadytobelieve.Itassumes that recent thinkinghas reacheda listof indubitable inductionsandthattheseareidenticalwithitsownpremises.Substantial,intelligibleproofsofthesepremisesarenowherediscoverableinitsliterature.

Not one of its writers impresses us as specially well read in philosophy,except H.W. Dresser, and his philosophical investigation evidently tended toprecipitategraduationfromcharacteristictenetsofjtheNewThoughtfraternity.1

AmongthesweepingbutunfoundedassumptionsofNewThoughtnonetakesprecedenceofthatwhichdefinesthenatureofGodandofman’srelationtohim.Ifnotchargeableasawholewithcanceling thepersonalityofGod, it iseitherfeeble and halting in its affirmation of personality, or, going a step further,exposes it to doubt. Some of its representatives, to save themselves from theappearance of relegatingGod to the impersonal range, speak of him as super-personal.Butthisexpedientaccomplishesnothingworthwhile.AswasindicatedinthecriticismofTheosophy,thesuper-personalisanemptyphrase.AGodwhocannot be described as personal, in other words, as possessed of self-consciousness and will, lacks the highest attributes of which we have anyconception, and for all practical purposes is lowered to the impersonal plane.Theappealtothenotion,or,rather,totheword,“super-personal,”isapoorshift,andwhoeverisdeceivedtherebyisnotwise.

A motive for skimping the personality of God plainly arises from thefundamental postulate on the oneness of life, the affirmation that God is theUniversal Life in which men are included as integral parts. The difficulty ofconstruing this proposition is not slight. In the first place, the notion ofdistinguishablepartsinGodhasaqueerlook.Thatnotionbelongstothedomain

76

of aggregates or masses. A physical entity made up of a great number ofmolecules may conceivably be distinguished into parts, so many moleculesbeingassignedtoonedivision,andsomanytoanother.Butwhatcanbemeantbyapartofspirit,apartof the infiniteSpirit,withwhichGodis identified.IsGod a sum of parts, an aggregate? He might be if he were simply a veryextensive physical entity, though even in that case therewould be occasion todemandaunitarypowerabovehimtocoordinatetheparts;butbeingSpirit,hecannotbeasumofparts.Intelligence,will,andmoralperfectionscannotbecutintosections,ordishedupwithacupasmaybedonewiththewaterofthesea.To make men parts of God amounts to a denial that the proper character ofspiritualitybelongseithertoGodormen.

Furthermore,onthebasisofthatrepresentationaquestionproperlyarisesastotheageofmen.If theyarenottobeaccountedeternal, thenGodmusthavebeensubjecttoincreasebytheiraddition,andthecontingentfindsplaceinhim.But, on the other hand, where can any warrant be found for rating men aseternal?Theirplaincharacteristicsasmutableandchanging,beginningwithaninfinitesimalmentalcapitalandadvancingbythepathofhardexperience,beliesthesupposition; revelationdoesnotcountenance it,andscientific investigationdiscoversfor itnoscrapofevidence.Inshort, thispartitiveconceptionofGodrejects rational interpretation. How greatly preferable is the long-standingconceptionofChristianphilosophy, thatman is ratheraproduct thanapartofGod, a product of the divine efficiency which so operates to initiate and tosustainhisbeingastoconstitutehimanagentaswellasaproduct.

ThemoralimplicationsoftheNewThoughtpostulateareastroublesomeasthemetaphysical.HowdoesitagreewiththeperfectwisdomofGodthatpartsofhimshould run into theabject folly inwhichnot a fewmen indulge?Howdoesitharmonizewithhisspotlessholinessthatpartsofhimshouldbestainedwith such abominablewickedness asmen often have placed to their account?HowuniteinoneBeing,andaBeingfiguredasthesupremeideal,theseflagrantcontradictions?The task isone that liesclose todespair.NewThoughtwritersconfessasmuchwhentheytonedown,curtail,andattheextremeevenabolishthenotionofsin.Hereintheyplayarolethatisatonceanti-biblical,anti-ethical,andanti-religious.TheBibleprofoundlyemphasizestheexceedingsinfulnessofsin,andfrombeginning toendseeks tofosteravitalsenseof itsdemerit.Thesafeguarding of ethical interests requires that the antithesis, the veritable gulfbetweenrighteousnessandunrighteousness,shouldbevividlyapprehended.

77

ReligionismadefarcicalwherenoplaceisleftforcompunctionoveraffrontstothelawsofGod.Itis,ofcourse,truethatamanmaydwellmorbidlyonhissins;butitisequallytruethathemaymorbidly,yeaabsurdly,palliateorignorehis sins.AndNewThought, it strikesus,virtually invites to this soul-scathingindifference and frivolity. When it asserts that every pin-point of experienceworks for betterment, that all things work together for good to everybody, itleavesthesinnerwithnologicalgroundforrepentance.Thereisnoreasonwhyheshouldcherisharegretforanything.Apenitentconfessionbecomesakindofburlesqueperformance.OntheNewThoughtbasisthepublicanmadeafoolofhimselfwhenheprayed,“Godbemercifultomeasinner!”Heoughtrathertohavesaid:“OLord,IgladlyrecognizethatIamadivinebeing.Iamasgoodasyouare.IamGodincarnate.”AsforthePharisee,hewasperfectlyrightinsofaras he took a high view of himself. His mistake was that he did not clearlyrecognizehisownessentialdivinity,andtheequaldivinityofallmen.Inneitherthe publican nor the Pharisee could a broken and contrite spirit properly berequired,andPaul’sexhortationnot to thinkofourselvesmorehighly thanweoughttothinkbelongstoanold-fashionedandobsoleteregime.Asdivinebeingswe are bound in deference to our actual status to eschewevery appearanceofself-abasement.NewThoughtwriterswouldnot, of course, state thematter injustthisform,butmanyoftheirsayingslogicallyprepareforthisoutcome,anditisnoticeablethatonemighttraversetheirbooksfrombeginningtoendwithoutcomingacrossasentencedesignedtocommendtheobligationtorepentanceorconfession. In relation to its healing art New Thought can claim themerit ofpowerfullyinculcatingtheefficacyofaserenetemper.Muchthatisurgedonthisscorecancordiallyberecognizedinsanemedicalpractice.Butnorespectispaidtonormallimits.Assertionsofthemostextravagantkindabound.Theexclusivevirtue assigned to thought is thoroughly one-sided. As H. W. Dresser hasremarked:“Lifeisintruthpartlyanaffairofthought,butnotchieflyso.Manisinpartwhatthoughthasmadehim,butfarmoretheresultofwill.Itis,indeed,important to make right affirmations, but of far more consequence to dosomething than to”hold the thought."2ThepsychologyofNewThoughtat thispoint is closely akin to that of Christian Science. Both the one and the otherrelatively ignore thewill and lay thewhole stresson certain linesof thinking.Evidently, this point of view involves a certain affinity with dogmatism, asplacingcorrectthinkingatapremium.NewThoughtwriters,itistrue,aremuchgiven to berating dogmas. But they are thinking of the dogmas of the churchwhich come into conflictwith their ownviews; and the curious feature in the

78

caseis that theycannotseethat theythemselvesareamongultradogmatists inthespiritinwhichtheyholdandchampiontheircherishedviews.

The assertion of the limitless power of thought, or, in other terms, of themind, over the body is simply an extravagant dogma. It is an assumption forwhichnosuitableproofcanbeafforded.Whatevercompetencymaybelong tomind in another range, minds of a finite order, such as we possess, have nocompletesovereigntyoverthebody.Thebeautyandnormalityofthesaintlysouldonotintheactualdispensationguaranteeevenanaveragestateofhealth.Thesaint, in point of physical condition, may be utterly distanced by the athleticoutlaw who makes a living by inhuman violence. Doubtless a revolution inmental tone may be attended by considerable physical results. The veryextravaganceof theNewThought tenet on thepowerofmindover bodymayhelptomakeitapotentmedicinetoaspeciallyconditionedsubject.Butavirtuewhichpertains to a fictionbecauseof its extravagance cannot authenticate thefictionorturnitintoatruth.Awideinductioniscertaintoshowupthefictionasoutlawedbyavastpreponderanceoffacts.

EvenshouldtheassumptionofNewThoughtonthepowerofmindtoshapebodilyconditionsbesubstantiallyconceded,aproblemforthehealingartwouldstillremain.Togettheidealresultthemindwouldneedtobenormallydirected.Andthatisanendmostdifficulttoachieve.Thebodyreactsuponthemind.Theenvironment works as a powerful factor. The subconscious mind, as NewThought teaches, may be a great storehouse of aberrant tendencies. With somanycurrentsimpinginguponconsciousmindandtendingtobiasthinking,theprobabilityofimperfectcontrolissimplyenormous.Thepatientmaybetoldthathisonecareshouldbetokeepthemindintherightchannelofthought.Butthatisamosttryingtask,andtheseriousattemptingofitmayawakenanxieties.Itispossibletogetanxiousoverthefulfillmentofthedemandnottobeintheleastdegreeanxious.The liability to thisexperiencehasbeen illustrated inverseasfollows:

IjoinedthenewDon’tWorryClub,AndnowIholdmybreath:IamsoscaredforfearI’llworryThatI’mworriedmosttodeath.

A schememore workable in the great majority of cases than that of NewThought,anddecidedlymoresalutary,istheonewhichteachesthepatientthat

79

the power of themind over the body, though appreciable, is not unlimited orunconditional,thatphysicalgoodissubordinatetohigherends,andthatthewisething to do is to cast oneself upon eternalWisdom andLove, and to pray forabilitytoreceivewithcalmnessandsweetnessoftempertheappointedresult.

AnoccasionforsomedegreeofcriticismofNewThoughtisfurnishedbytheprominencewhichitgivestothetherapeuticvalueofvirtuoustempers.Itmaybelegitimateenoughtoplaceconsiderableemphasisonthispointofview.Virtuoustempers,Christlikedispositions,undoubtedlyarefavorabletothehealthoftheirpossessor. But they have a value that cannot properly be measured on atherapeuticscale.Theyarethegloryofthehumanspirit,thecontentofspiritualexcellence,andtheobligationtocultivatethemwouldbeoverwhelmingeveniftheir relation to bodily weal were perfectly indifferent. We are glad that theadvocates of New Thought so strongly inculcate them. We cannot, however,escape the feeling that theprominencewhich isgiven to theirconnectionwithphysicalhealthtendstoplacethembelowtheplaneoftheirproperdignityandworth. Things that are central may affect the superficies; but, if they are tooconstantlyassociatedwiththesuperficies,theircentralityceasestobedulyrated.

Reference was made to the optimism characteristic of New Thought. Theextremetowhichitrunsmakesitjustasdubiousintendencyastheextravagantpessimismwhichhasbeentaughtinrecenttimes.Moralstrenuousnesscertainlycannotbepromotedbyasystemwhichloudlyproclaimsthatthereisnodangerahead, that all experience serves as a steppingstone to better things, and thateverymanisabsolutelysureofunalloyedhappiness.Asoporificofthiskindisabsurdlyoutofplace.Thesombersideof lifeanddestinymayindeeddeservethelesserattention,buttoignoreitistosubstituteroseatemisleadingdreamsforrealities.

While,therefore,itistruethattheNewThoughtmovementhasgivenworthyexpressiontonotafewvaluabletruths,wearenonethelessforcedtoconcludethatithasenthroneddogmaswhicharefalseandmischievousintendency.ThegoodwhichNewThoughtinculcatescanbefoundinourcommonChristianity.Thereisnoseriousoccasion,therefore,toturntoitsliteratureforanysubstantialfurnishing.

1. ProfessorJ.B.AndersoninhistrenchantbookentitledNewThought,ItsLights and Shadows, notices in particular the lack of philosophicalcompetency shown by New Thought waiters, in that their system is aself-contradictoryblendofmonismandpluralism.↩

80

2. AMessagetotheWell,p.77.↩

81

AbouttheLutheranLibraryPublishingMinistry

The Lutheran Library exists to promote knowledge, understanding andwisdombyfinding,carefullyrestoring,andrepublishingaccurate,well-written,andreadablebookssuitableforself-learning.Alltitlesareavailableatlittleornocharge inhand-formattedKindle,EPUB,andPDFversions toworkwithmostdevices.

The Lutheran Library editors believe, teach and confess the evangelicalChristian faith as described by the Ecumenical Creeds, The AugsburgConfession, The Formula of Concord, and the other sections of the Book ofConcord.

SomeAuthorsForYouToDiscover

Jacobs,HenryEyster,(1844-1932)

Krauth,CharlesPorterfield,(1823-1883)

Lehmanowsky,JohnJacob,(1773-1858)

Long,SimonPeter,(1860-1929)

Loy,Matthias,(1828-1915)

Schmauk,TheodoreEmanuel,(1860-1920)

GreatNarratives

82

My experiences in themission field of SouthDakota during the years1892-1897byFrankAlbertKiess

MyDogsintheNorthlandbyEgertonRyersonYoung

DixieKittenbyEvaMarchTappan

LettersfromaCatbyHelenHuntJackson

Topics

Biography

Theology&History

Devotional

Missions&Service

Extras!

HowCanOneFindPeaceWithGod?

ThemostimportantthingtograspisthatoneismaderightwithGodnotbyanygoodthingsheorshemightdo.Justificationisbyfaithonly,andthatfaithrests in theone-time substitutionarydeathof JesusChrist forone’s sins.ReadyourBiblesteadily.GodworksHispowerinhumanbeingsthroughHisWord.

Prayersarerequestedforthenextgeneration,thattheLordwillplantinthema love of the truth, and that the hard-learned lessons of the past will not beforgotten.

IfYouFindTypographicErrors

83

Nomatterhowpureourintentions,sometyposdogetthrough.Pleasereportanyyoufind.Theywillbecorrectedforthebenefitoffuturereaders.

WanttobenotifiedofFutureReleases?

Signupnow.LutheranLibrary.org–“FaithfultotheReformation”

84

CatalogofTitles

All titles are available to you in a variety of formats at no charge. Read.Study.Reflect.GrowintheknowledgeofthegraceofourLord.

With best wishes to you for Reformation Day 2018 from the LutheranLibrary.

101Lehmanowsky,JohnJacob.ATaleofTwoCaptains

102Sandt,GeorgeWashington.BiographyofTheodoreSchmauk

103Gerberding,GeorgeHenry.NewTestamentConversions

104Schmauk,TheodoreEmanuel.TheConfessionalPrinciple

105Gerberding,GeorgeHenry.BiographyofWilliamPassavant

106Scriver,Christian.Gotthold’sEmblems

108Gerberding,GeorgeHenry.TheLutheranCountryChurch

109Jacobs,HenryEyster.ASummaryoftheChristianFaith

110Krauth,CharlesPorterfield.InfantBaptisminCalvinism

111Gerberding,GeorgeHenry.What’sWrongWithTheWorld

112Greenwald,Emanuel.WhyTheReformation?

114Jacobs,HenryEyster.MartinLuther:TheHerooftheReformation

116Gerberding,GeorgeHenry.ThePriesthoodofBelievers

117Jacobs,HenryEyster.TheBookofConcord:Epitome

120Luther,Martin.FirstPrinciplesoftheReformation

121White,RalphJerome.SixYearsinHammockLand

125Hosmer,JamesKendell.TheStoryoftheJews

133Greenwald,Emanuel.JustificationByFaith

85

138Dolbeer,WilliamHenry.TheBenediction

139Stromme,PeerOlsen.ChurchHistory:JustTheBasics

141Fesperman,JosephHamilton.TheLifeofaSufferer

143Whitteker,JohnEdwin.GospelTruths

144Whitteker,JohnEdwin.ChurchandState

145Stump,Joseph.Melanchthon

149 Greenwald, Emanuel. Pastor Louis Harms and the Church atHermansburg

155Miller,CharlesArmand.ThePerfectPrayer

156Laird,Samuel.SelectionofSermons

158 Morris, John Gottlieb. Life Reminiscences of an Old LutheranMinister

163LutheranTreasuryofPrayers

168 Brown, James Allen. The Anti-Lutheran Theology of Dr. S. S.Schmucker

169Einspruch,Henry.TheMostNotedJewishBookintheWorld

170Lichtenstein,Isaac.AnAppealtotheJewishPeople

171Loy,Matthias.TheDoctrineofJustification

176Neve,JuergenLudwig.ChurchesandSectsofChristendom

180Loy,Matthias.TheStoryofMyLife

185Dau,WilliamHermanTheodore.LutherExaminedandReexamined

188Schuh,LewisHerman.FuneralSermonsofLutheranDivines

189Greenwald,Emanuel.TheBaptismofChildren

190Long,SimonPeter.TheWayMadePlain

196Kiess, FrankAlbert.My experiences in the mission field of SouthDakota

201Long,SimonPeter.PreparetoMeetThyGod

86

207Harms,JohnHenry.TheVictoryofFaith:LutheranMeditations

209Horine,Mahlon.TheBookofRuth

212Huber,Eli.FoodFortheHeavenlyWay

213Ochsenford, Solomon Erb. The Passion Story as Recorded by theFourEvangelists

221Keyser, Leander Sylvester. The Conflict Between FundamentalismandModernism

222 Keyser, Leander Sylvester. Election and Conversion. A FrankDiscussionofDr.FranzPieper’sBook

225Young,EgertonRyerson.MyDogsintheNorthland

236Sheldon,HenryClay.TheosophyandNewThought

240Lenski&Stellhorn.WhichPredestination:ReformedorLutheran?

241Lenski,Schmidt&Gohdes.IntuituFideiElectionInViewofFaith

242Lenski,Allwardt&Tressel.ElectionandPredestination:TheBlueIslandTheses

247Krauth, Charles Porterfield. A Sermon on the Burning of the OldLutheranChurch

249Sander,John.DevotionalReadingsfromLuther’sWorks

253Mahan,Milo.Palmoni:TheNumeralsofScripture

259Morris,John.ToRomeandBackAgain

272Wells,AmosRussel.ABibleYear

s01Krauth,CharlesPorterfield.SayingsofCharlesPorterfieldKrauth

s02Greenwald,Emanuel.TheTrueChurch

s03Wolf,EdmundJacob.JohnBurns:HeroofGettysburg

“Extras”

87

e10Diaz,Abby.TheCats’ArabianNights

e15Grimalkin,Tabitha.TalesfromCatland

e16Elwes,Alfred.TheAdventuresofaCat

e17Elwes,Alfred.TheAdventuresofaDog

e18Elwes,Alfred.TheAdventuresofaBear

e19Jackson,HelenHunt.LettersfromaCat

e22Jackson,Gabrielle.TheAdventuresofTommyPostOffice

e25Cowles,Julia.Crow’sLanguageLessons

e26Smith,Jeanie.Zephyr:AChristmasStory

e28Tappan,EvaMarch.DixieKitten

e32Bacon,Peggy.TheTruePhilosopherandOtherCatTales

e38Davis,RichardHarding.TheBarSinister

e41Carr,WalterE.TheStoryofFiveDogs

TheLutheranLibrary

The goal of theLutheranLibrary is to re-releasewell-written and readablebooks from sound, faithfulAmerican Lutherans of the past for the enjoymentand edification of a new generation. All books are available atlutheranlibrary.orgforfreedownloadinavarietyofformatsforKindle,Apple,andotherdevices.

Yourhelpisappreciatedinspreadingthewordasoftenandinasmanywaysasyoufeelisappropriate.

MayGod bless you and keep you, help you, defend you, and lead you toknowthedepthofHislove.Amen

88

Benediction

Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present youfaultlessbeforethepresenceofhisglorywithexceedingjoy,

TotheonlywiseGodourSavior,begloryandmajesty,dominionandpower,bothnowandever.Amen.–Jude1:24-25

89

TableofContents

CopyrightInformation 4Contents 5Preface 7PartI–Theosophy 8Chapter1.HistoricalOutlines 9Chapter2.AppraisalOfTheosophyByTheosophists 13Chapter3.TheAttitudeAssumedTowardCompetingFaiths 15Chapter4.TheBasisOfAuthority 21Chapter5.TheDoctrineOfGod 25Chapter6.CosmologicalTheories 29Chapter7.ConceptionsOfManAndHisDestiny 35Chapter8.TheTheosophicPrincipleOfAuthorityTested 43

1.MadameBlavatskyfalsifiedherHistorywithSpiritualism 432.MadameBlavatskyPlayedtheRoleofaCharlatanandTrickster. 443.TheosophyWasDrawnFromModernWritings,nottheMahatmas. 474.Tibetnotevidenceofexceptionallyendowedinstructors 485.WherearetheBenefitsoftheSupposedMahatmas? 496.SkepticismofTheosophists 50

Chapter9.CommentsOnProminentFeaturesOfTheTheosophicalSystem 52

PartII–NewThought 57Chapter1.GeneralSketch 58Chapter2.TheDoctrineOfMan 64Chapter3.TheConceptionOfGodAndOfMan’sRelationToHim 68Chapter4.TheTherapeuticScheme 73Chapter5.SomeGroundsOfCriticism 76

AbouttheLutheranLibraryPublishingMinistry 82SomeAuthorsForYouToDiscover 82GreatNarratives 82Topics 83

90

HowCanOneFindPeaceWithGod? 83IfYouFindTypographicErrors 83WanttobenotifiedofFutureReleases? 84

CatalogofTitles 85“Extras” 87TheLutheranLibrary 88

Benediction 89

91