(_To be continued._) [Illustration: decorative separator] “Spirituality is not what we understand by the words ‘virtue’ or ‘goodness.’ It is the power of perceiving formless, spiritual essences.”—(_Jasper Niemand in the “Path.”_) “The discovery and right use of the true essence of Being—this is the whole secret of life.”—(_Jasper Niemand in the “Path.”_) ------------------ DESIRE MADE PURE. When desire is for the purely abstract—when it has lost all trace or tinge of “self”—then it has become pure. The first step towards this purity is to kill out the desire for the things of matter, since these _can_ only be enjoyed by the separated personality. The second is to cease from desiring for oneself even such abstractions as power, knowledge, love, happiness, or fame; for they are but selfishness after all. Life itself teaches these lessons; for all such objects of desire are found Dead Sea fruit in the moment of attainment. This much we learn from experience. Intuitive perception seizes on the _positive_ truth that satisfaction is attainable only in the infinite; the will makes that conviction an actual fact of consciousness, till at last all desire is centred on the Eternal. THOUGHTS ON THEOSOPHY. “The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life,” this is the keynote of all true reform. Theosophy is the vehicle of the spirit that gives life, consequently nothing _dogmatic_ can be truly _theosophical_. It is incorrect, therefore, to describe a _mere_ unearthing of dead letter dogmas as “Theosophic work.” When a word, phrase, or symbol, having been once used for the purpose of suggesting an idea _new_ to the mind or minds being operated on, is insisted upon irrespective of the said idea, it becomes a dead letter dogma and loses its vitalising power, and serves rather as an obstruction to, than as vehicle of the spirit; but, alas, this insistance upon the letter is too often carried on under the honoured name of “Theosophy.” A man cannot acquire an idea _new to him_ unless it _grows_ in his mind. The mere familiarity with the _sound_ of a word, or a phrase, or the mere familiarity with the _appearance_ of a symbol, does not, of _necessity_, involve the possession of the idea properly associated with the said word, phrase or symbol. To insist, therefore, on the contrary cannot be theosophical; but would be better described as _un_theosophical.