The solitary ascetic, H.P. Blavatsky argues is the embodiment of cowardice and egotism. In context, she is alluding to Hatha-Yogis and Chrisitan mortification practice. She further explains that “a hermit who flees from his brothers instead of helping them to carry the burden of life, to work for others, and to put their shoulders to the wheel of social life, is a coward who hides himself when the battle is on and goes to sleep drunk on an opiate.” In connection to this, K.H. addresses in a letter from Kashmir to A.P. Sinnett regarding his motives for furthering communication with them for instruction in the study of their philosophy. This urgency and sense of the mission as being vitally important to the progress of spiritual philosophy is similarly expressed in “The Great Master’s Letter.”

“The mysteries never were, never can be, put within the reach of the general public, not, at least, until that longed for day when our religious philosophy becomes universal. At no time have more than a scarcely appreciable minority of men possessed nature’s secret, though multitudes have witnessed the practical evidences of the possibility of their possession. The adept is the rare efflorescence of a generation of enquirers. (…) He who would lift up high the banner of mysticism and proclaim its reign near at hand, must give the example to others. He must be the first to change his modes of life; and, regarding the study of the occult mysteries as the upper step in the ladder of Knowledge must loudly proclaim it such despite exact science and the opposition of society. “The Kingdom of Heaven is obtained by force” say the Christian mystics. It is but with armed hand, and ready to either conquer or perish that the modern mystic can hope to achieve his object.”

K.H. THE MAHATMA LETTERS TO A.P. SINNETT, SIMLA, OCT. 19TH, 1880

RICHARD KING ON THE SUBJECTIVE ESCAPISM OF MODERN MYSTICISM

“The privatisation of mysticism – that is, the increasing tendency to locate the mystical in the psychological realm of personal experiences – serves to exclude it from political issues as social justice. Mysticism thus becomes seen as a personal matter of cultivating inner states of tranquility and equanimity, which, rather than seeking to transform the world, serve to accommodate the individual to the status quo through the alleviation of anxiety and stress.”

RICHARD KING, ORIENTALISM AND RELIGION: POST-COLONIAL THEORY, INDIA AND “THE MYSTIC EAST,” 2002.

Published by Dominique Johnson

View all posts by Dominique Johnson