Blavatsky Answers Anand's Charge of Fake Letters
Oct 12, 2008 09:34 AM
H. P. Blavatsky Herself Answers the Substance
of Anand's Charge of Fake Letters from the Masters..
In October 1888, Madame Blavatsky wrote on this very subject which
Anand now brings up in 2008:
We have been asked by a correspondent why he should not "be free to
suspect some of the so-called 'precipitated' letters as being
forgeries," giving as his reason for it that while some of them bear
the stamp of (to him) undeniable genuineness, others seem from their
contents and style, to be imitations.
This is equivalent to saying that he has such an unerring spiritual
insight as to be able to detect the false from the true, though he
has never met a Master, nor been given any key by which to test his
alleged communications. The inevitable consequence of applying his
untrained judgment in such cases, would be to make him as likely as
not to declare false what was genuine, and genuine what was false.
Thus WHAT CRITERION has any one to decide between one "precipitated"
letter, or another such letter? Who except their authors, or those
whom they employ as their amanuenses (the chelas and disciples), can
For it is hardly one out of a hundred "occult" letters that is ever
written by the hand of the Master, in whose name and on whose behalf
they are sent, as the Masters have neither need nor leisure to write
them; and that when a Master says, "I wrote that letter," it means
only that every word in it was dictated by him and impressed under his
Generally they make their chela, whether near or far away, write (or
precipitate) them, by impressing upon his mind the ideas they wish
expressed, and if necessary aiding him in the picture-printing
process of precipitation. It depends entirely upon the chela's state
of development, how accurately the ideas may be transmitted and the
Thus the non-adept recipient is left in the dilemma of uncertainty,
whether, if one letter is false, all may not be; for, as far as
intrinsic evidence goes, all come from the same source, and all are
brought by the same mysterious means.
But there is another, and a far worse condition implied. For all that
the recipient of "occult" letters can possibly know, and on the
simple grounds of probability and common honesty, the unseen
correspondent [Master Koot Hoomi] who would tolerate one single
fraudulent line in his name, would wink at an unlimited repetition of
the deception. And this leads directly to the following.
All the so- called occult letters being supported by identical
proofs, they have all to stand or fall together. If one is to be
doubted, then all have, and the series of [Mahatma] letters in
the "Occult World," "Esoteric Buddhism," [by A.P. Sinnett] etc.,
etc., may be, and there is no reason why they should not be in such
a case - frauds, "clever impostures," and "forgeries," . . . .
LUCIFER, October, 1888
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application