Universal brotherhood, planetary citizenship and the search for eternal wisdom are among the central
ideas inspiring this website.Studying the original teachings of the modern theosophical movement
is a means to achieve such goals. Visit our blog: www.Esoteric-Philosophy.com
Write to our contact email: Indelodge@gmail.com . Read about our E-Group: E-Theosophy

Letters Between Blavatsky and Judge - 02

William Judge Apologizes to Helena Blavatsky
William Q. Judge

Adyar Headquarters in 1884: a drawing made by William
Q.  Judge  on the spot, and published in “The Path” magazine
A 2011 Editorial Note:
In the following letter, dated May 16, 1885, William
Judge answers to the May 1 letter from H. P. Blavatsky
to him.  (See “Letters Between Blavatsky and Judge - 1”)
We reproduce the text from “Theosophical History”,
volume VI, number 5, January 1997, pp. 164-166.
The editor of the magazine, James Santucci, writes in
his “Editor’s Comments” that the present text “survived
thanks to the archives of the Theosophical Society at
Adyar and to the detective work of Michael Gomes.”  We
thank “Theosophical History” for publishing this document.
Underlined words are thus in the original. The transcriber,
Mr. Gomes, writes he believes the underlining was done by
Henry S. Olcott. Words in brackets, followed by question
marks, are attempts by the transcriber to understand the
original. A question mark in square brackets - [?] - means
that there is doubt as to the word in the originals.
While writing the present letter, W. Q. Judge was still struggling to
understand the 1884-1885 events. He soon would learn the lesson of
confidence in H.P.B.’s honesty, to which this letter refers, and play a key
role in the theosophical movement. In 1893, in his text “A Reminiscence”,
he wrote: “It remains a fact that the T.S. [the theosophical movement]
stands or falls by H.P. Blavatsky. Give her up as an idea, withdraw from
the path traced by her under orders, belittle her, and the organization
will rot; but remember her and what she represented, and we triumph.”
(“Theosophical Articles”, W. Q. Judge, Theosophy Co., vol. I, p. 162.)
(Carlos Cardoso Aveline)
Dear H.P.B.                                                                      May 16, 1885
A pall of horrible misunderstanding seems to be about us. When I left India I left letters for you & Olcott fully explaining & also assuring you of my continued affection & friendship, but Olcott only writes to abuse me and you to grieve over my backsliding. Then from London I wrote you again assuring you that I was all right. Now I get yours from Greco. I am sorry indeed. Humanity seems to never get any better but steadily worse.
Ah! that pig of a Doctor.[1] My first surmise was correct. He seemed bad and dangerous, but I was lulled by letters from the Masters he had received in which he was commended and I was foolish enough to give him confidentially, some analyses of your character which I had better have kept to myself  but I was no worse than Olcott.  All of it was impersonal for I did not suppose we were trying to injure you. I was certainly not.
I do not care what you did or what you are I am still the same friend as ever and shall so remain.
All I ever said was that it seemed as if you had lied and played tricks now and then but I always said that still I believed in you. And I do. Let us not beat around the bush. You have lied now & then & perhaps played some tricks but I tell you I do not care a tinker’s damn. [2] You are to me as you were ever and what silly steps I have taken were due to bad policy of Olcott’s in a way that it is useless to go into.
I did not leave India because I got a message from a Mahatma. I never got any message from any Mahatma either pretended or real while I was in India. That disposes of Hartmann. He couldn’t fool me with anything. When I announced my intended return he was pleased as a hen with an egg and almost cackled, but pretended to be sorry and tried to dissuade me. I merely told him so that if Damodar refused me the money he would lend it and he did promise it in case Damodar failed me; that was all. If H.S.O. had not been so nearly [?] there I would not have left. But I had decided long before and only waited this long so that Hartmann should have no time to do any damage. I was therefore right. And I tell I did no harm by leaving. O. writes I “threw away the crown” &c. To the [devil?] with such folly. If I thought I wanted a crown I would at once renounce the chance leading to it. My dear HPB if Master will not enlighten you about me then I must say nothing and remain to work out my own salvation as I can.
If Olcott hadn’t been such a fearful phenomena monger we should never have had so much trouble. But he must always retail everything he ever saw or heard of.
I tell you neither you, nor Olcott, nor Holloway , nor deceit, nor trick, nor message, nor devil, nor Hartmann, had anything to do with my departure from India, and perhaps someday that departure will be of benefit to the Society and the Cause.
What I wrote about to Hartmann is a ridiculous message about Holloway which if it emanated from a Mahatma showed lack of knowledge to say the least. But let us drop that.
I am as staunch a friend as ever. I thank you for your belief in me. As to the Billing drama [3]   it is folly and fraud. I am sorry you ever placed yourself in her favor or that I ever saw her. 
The last are these:
1. H.S.O. writes “you (I) left India because you have 2 children.”  2. H.S.O. writes two weeks after “Ah! you left because Hartmann palmed off on you a pretended [directive?] so to do.”
H.S.O. had better think first and then speak. As for L.C. Holloway enough said. I have not seen her since I came back except to deliver a pair of [drawers?] Miss Arundale bought her in London. She does not like me.
I would like to see you again. I have made a contract for six months expiring Oct. next or before, to work here in a law office. After that I know not what; and I care not. I will not explain again in writing. I enclose you the case of a friend who asks advice. You may be able to make some suggestions.
As ever then, I remain faithful to you as well as to the cause and begging your pardon for needless criticisms.
William Q. Judge
[1] This is a reference to Dr. Franz Hartmann. (CCA)
[2] At this point Judge is still profoundly misled. He had been the victim of intrigue and misinformation while he was India. H. P. Blavatsky did not lie, and did not play tricks. This fact, by the way, is of the greatest and most decisive importance, for no liar or trickster can ever be a true theosophist, or deserve anyone’s confidence. Having been born under the Zodiacal sign of Leo, with Moon in Libra, Ascendant in Cancer, and Saturn and Mercury in Virgo, H.P. Blavatsky had self-confidence and self-respect enough to be utterly sincere; and her mistake, if there was one, was perhaps to be at times too aggressive towards false people and liars. This personal feeling she evidently tried to control, with partial success. (CCA)
[3] As to Mrs. Billing, see “Letters Between Blavatsky and Judge - 01”. (CCA)
On the role of the esoteric movement in the ethical awakening of mankind during the 21st century, see the book “The Fire and Light of Theosophical Literature”, by Carlos Cardoso Aveline.  
Published in 2013 by The Aquarian Theosophist, the volume has 255 pages and can be obtained through Amazon Books.

Letters Between Blavatsky and Judge - 02

© 2016 www.TheosophyOnline.com

Home Our E-group E-Theosophy Links List of Texts in Alphabetical Order