No doubt the time has now gone by when the policy that thus inaugurated the Theosophical movement is either practicable or desirable. “The age of miracles is past,” for us as for mankind at large,—always making allowance for the familiar correction required by the saying that the age for helping on the more general comprehension of those resources of nature with which the “miracles” had to do has not passed, by any means. The interpretation of Nature—the promulgation of truth concerning the “powers latent in Man”—to the end that the world at large may the better understand its own destinies and promote its own healthier development through an immediate future, is still the ample task that lies before the working members of our organization. Again let us say that no one proposes to divorce this from recognition with which it is so intimately blended, of the sublime morality expressed in the phrase—the Brotherhood of Man. But in our zeal for the starry goal in the far distance, it will be discreet, on our part, to avoid the mistake of the Greek philosopher and not to forget the ground at our feet. A. P. SINNETT. * * * * * NOTE.—The admirable letter which we have printed above from the able pen of the author of Esoteric Buddhism is a good instance of the truth that there are many ways of arriving at the same goal, and incidentally it also illustrates how difficult it is for those who look at any subject by the light of their own “ray” to appreciate the view taken of it by one whose mental constitution is different. Both Murdhna Joti and Mr. Sinnett are right from their own points of view, and as they understand themselves. Both seem to us to be wrong as they probably understand each other. Patriotism and family attachments as understood by Mr. Sinnett are good things, for he characterises them by the adjectives “healthy” “ennobling” “generous.” It cannot be supposed from either a critical or casual reading of “The Higher Life” that Murdhna Joti advocates the elimination of any statement to which these terms would apply. But patriotism and family attachments may be narrow, bigoted, and founded upon an ignorance of other countries and other families, and upon an inability to perceive in other nations and persons the very qualities that make us feel warmly toward those we are acquainted with, intensified by a corresponding blindness to faults we have become habituated to and perhaps partake of ourselves. It is the “provincialism” of patriotism which breeds the prejudice in favor of things which are a part of our “larger selves,” and which is bad; and this narrowness in the case of family attachment (a different thing from personal affection), makes us fancy that our family geese are more beautiful than our neighbor’s swans. It is in this sense, it seems to us, that the family defects in question are held by Murdhna Joti as