THE NEW YORK PUBLIC LIBRARY 4 5 29 4 8 15 T LENOX AND AS OR, F OI' NDATIONS 1 0 43 PYR G T 1 9 BY H N N Y CO I H , 08, KAT ERI E TI GLE PREF ACE HE remarks under this head are intended to be introductory to each of the Manuals . are oi First, as to the spirit in which they t fe ed . These Manuals are not written in a i controversial spirit, nor as an addit on to the k stoc of theories awaiting public approval . The writers have no time to waste in arguing d with people who do not wish to be convince , or who ridicule everything which is new to e their limited outlook . Th ir message is for those who desire to know those who are seeking for something that will solve their difii lti cu es. doubts and remove their For such , all that is needed is a clear exposition of the Theosophical teachings ; for they will judge of the truth of a teaching by its power to an swer the questions they ask . People realize, much more now than in the early days of the S of Theosophical ociety, the value Theosophy ; iv PREF ACE for the ever- increasing diflicultics engendered l h l by se fis ness and materia ism , by doubt and i c o f the mult pli ity theories, have created an i can s urgent demand wh ch it alone atisfy . Again, it is necessary to state clearly and emphatically the genuine teachings of Theo S ophy, as given by the Founder of the Theo s k d S . an ophical ociety, H P Blavats y, her s uccessors , William Q . Judge and Katherine Tingley . For, as H . P . Blavatsky predicted , there are persons who have sought to pervert these teachings and turn them into a source of profit to themselves and their own selfish and ambitious schemes . The true teachings do not lend themselves to such purposes ; their f h ideals are o t e purest and most unselfish . Hence these persons have sought to promul gate under the name of Theosophy a perverted o f the Brotherli form teachings , from which ness and other pure motives are omitted , and Blavat which contains doctrines which H . P . maleficcnt i sky showed to be and destruct ve . As these pseudo- Theosophists have gained a certain amount of notoriety by using the names S of the Theosophical ociety and its Leaders , it is necessary to warn the public against them PREF ACE ti a n s and their misrepresenta ons . Their te chi g i be to can eas ly shown , by comparison , be di f r o . ectly contrary to those H P Blavatsky , o whom they nevertheless profess t follow . In f - sacrifice stead o having for their basis self , self- purification and the elevation of the hu to man race, these teachings too often pander ambition , vanity and curiosity . In many cases they are altogether ridiculous , and only cal culated a to m ke people laugh . Nevertheless , as these travesties have served to discredit the name of Theosophy and to keep earnest in uirers the q away from the truth, it is well that public should know their nature and origin . They are the work of people who wereat one i t me members of the Theosophical Society, but who did not find in it that food for their own personalities of which they were really in o search . S they turned against their teachers i e in wounded pride and van ty, and started littl societies of their own with themselves at the head. The writers of these Manuals have no per u sonal grievance against any s ch calumniators . Inspired by a profound love of the sublime o f it teachings , Theosophy, they have made vi PREF ACE their life- work to bring the benefits which they have thereby received within the reach o f as many people as possible . And they feel that they will have the hearty sympathy and co o peration o f the public in exposing folly and h bringing t etruth to light . Theosophy strikes unfamiliar ground in m odern civilization, because it does not come under any particular oneof thefamiliar head i f o S . t ngs Religion, cience, Philosophy, etc in o which our age has divided its speculative ac i i i s the t v t es. It date back to a period in history o f mankind when such distinctions did not ex but one G or n ist, there was nosis K owledge embracing all . Religion and Science, as we e a have th m tod y, are but imperfect growths springing from the remnants of that great - i ancient system, the Wisdom Relig on, which included all that we now know as religion and s and . cience , much more Hence Theosophy will not appeal to thesame motives as religion ff and science . It will not o er any cheap and easy salvation or put a premium upon mental e inactivity and spiritual selfishn ss . Neither can it accomodate itself to the rules laid down by various schools of modern thought as to PREF ACE vii d not what constitutes proof an what does . o But it can and does appeal to the Reas n . The truth of doctrines such as Theosophy t maintains, can only be es imated by their ability to solve problems and by their harmony t to wi h other truths which we know be true. But in addition to this we have the testimony o f too c the ages, which has been long negle ted now e by modern scholarship, but which is b ing i revealed by archaeolog sts and scholars , as s in H . P . Blavatsky prophe ied that it would this century . It may perhaps be as well also to remind of those who would criticise, that the state modern opinion is scarcely such as to warrant anybody in assuming the attitude of a judge . e It would be quite pr per for a Theosophist, instead of answering questions or attempting ! t to give proofs , to demand hat his questioners c s and to should first state their own a e, be himself the questioner . The result would cer . inl ta y show that Theosophy, to say the very on n least, stands an equal footing with ay is no other view , since there certain know x to d ledge, no satisfying e planation , be foun anywhere . PREPACE Since the days when the wave of material ism swept over the world , obliterating the traces of the ancient Wisdom- Religion and replacing it by theological dogrnatism our re ligions have had nothing to offer us in the way o f a philosophical explanation of the laws of Being as revealed in Man and in Nature . Instead we have only had bare statements nd m a dog atic assertions . The higher nature o f man is represented by such vague words r i as Spi it and Soul , wh ch have little or no m for eaning the majority . The laws of the universe are briefly summed up under the ” t God of erm , and all further consideration ff a them shut o . Then came a reaction ag inst m ' the dogmatis of religion , and man pinned his faith to knowledge gained by study and se r reflection , limiting his re a ches however to the outer world as presented by the senses , and fearing to trench upon the ground which dogmatic theology had rendered the field of n so much co tention . The result of this has b een that neither in religions nor sciences , have we any teaching about the higher na ture of man or the deeper mysteries of the u niverse . This is a field which is left entirely PREF ACE ix or of unexplored, is at best the subject ten i tat ve and unguided conjectures . Until , therefore, religious teachers have satisfac something definite , consistent, and ff ca tory to o er, and until science n give us something better than mere confessions o f nescience or impudent denials with regard to everything beyond its own domain , Theosophy can afford to assume the role of questioner rather than that of questioned, and does not owe anybody any explanations whatever . It is sufii cient to state its tenets and let them vindicate themselves by their greater reason ableness ; and any further explanation that may be offered is ofi ered rather from good i will than from any obligat on . Theosophy undertakes to explain that which t i o her systems leave unexpla ned , and is , on i its own spec al ground , without a competitor . h It can issue a c allenge to theology, science , and other modern systems, to surpass it in giving a rational explanation of the facts of life . Again , there are some questions which it is its beyond the reach of the human mind, in resent sta eo develo ment p g f p , to answer ; and PREF ACE it would scarcely be just to arraign Theo n t sophy for o answering these . Judgment should in all cases be preceded u by careful st dy. There are always those who will impatiently rush to questions which a further study would have rendered un necessary ; and it is safe to say that the “ ” majority of objections raised to Theosoph ical teachings are such as could have been e solved by the obj ctor himself, had he been a genuine student.