1
10
7
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/8eed9b9ee63eb040fca306368c71fc01.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ZxlfHhaGF6brDP5Cu1Q7QUykw-LPMmSpevWT6HMxGYQXUGiP1E9imZNGLW9gbiJXVDN9zv42XNaR9OLGkr0Y9JL52GiKufFyv6NC1YqSgLc4GtkMqpC-2afD0C5BOmzUMEzS%7EO9Kf2xoSUeBlMF4GvyfTx3S4CYkffhoFKSGxrEnyfzrxmk1rPRQGHdJTSl0ZtVDuJ-P4QO3CezGZp%7Ecf093ZEP-DqZXNrMGAOyNux9-w0fOdRVplgBfFQMRSclaBUIE4PA0yqDtoI%7E%7E41huw9WRZhwQfT1pf8oXbIkFevn3-t9-crcuVA8Y0R88KGIAg-RdEWLYIT2rNdnnaidLbQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
d2bc416707cc25aa9c4e81f8f299e173
PDF Text
Text
THEOSOPHY
Edited by
L. de Grandmaison, S.J.
We propose to describe in this paper the modern
movement known as Theosophical, not only because
it challenges our attention owing to its wide and
rapid diffusion, and by the number of adepts it
ceaselessly draws from the older and established
forms of religion, but because in it we can observe
the permanence of some of the strangest, as well
as the most general, of religious tendencies—such,
especially, as manifested themselves when dying
paganism made its supreme effort to kill, and itself
to draw life from, nascent Christianity. Moreover,
the founders of modern Theosophy have without
exception connected their doctrines with, and
modelled their formulae upon, ancient and mysterious
systems of religious thought, such especially as
India has produced. They strive also to link with
these the most modern concepts of philosophy or
postulates of science—the results, in their religious
aspect, of Darwinian evolution, Hegelian idealistic
monism, or of Pragmatism, and much more, forming
a singularly comprehensive totality of doctrine.
We intend, therefore, according to the plan generally
followed in this series, to describe first the history,
then the doctrines of modern Theosophy, noting
always its historical or philosophical connections
with kindred systems.1
1 Since, however, the scope of this series is not controversial, but
expository, we are content to refer the reader for a discussion of the
35
i
�2
The History of Religions
[35
I. The Founders of Theosophy
Though both the word Theosophy, and, in a sense,
the thing, are far older (as modern Theosophists are
the first to assert, and as we shall see below) than the
movement which officially began on 17th November
1875, what is popularly known as Theosophy can
never be dissociated from the names of Mme.
Blavatsky, of Mrs. Annie Besant, and, in a secondary
measure, from that of Col. Henry Streete Olcott.
(i) Helen Petrovna Hahn (1831-1891) was a
member of a noble family of South Russia, connected
through her mother with the Princes Dolgorouki.
She married General Nicephoros Blavatsky, second
in command of the Caucasian province Erivan.
Her extremely brief married life was stormy; she
fled from her husband at the age of seventeen, re
nounced the life imposed by the ordinary conditions
of society, and travelled for a considerable time,
especially in the Far East. There we are told (by
Mrs. Besant) she became the disciple of a great master
of Oriental wisdom, and became fully possessed of
that occult lore to the propagation of which her life
was henceforward devoted. A first attempt to found
a spiritistic society in Egypt failed. She crossed to
America, where she met Col. Olcott, who had been
an officer in the Northern army. He was an ex
medium and a journalist, and was examining the
spiritistic phenomena connected with the brothers
Eddy. He came entirely under her influence, though
she seems to have had a poor enough opinion of
truth and value of Theosophy to the excellent brochure of E. R. Hull, S. J.,
editor of the Bombay Examiner, entitled Theosophy and Christianity,
C.T.S., 6d. Cf too L. de Grand maison, Le Lotus Bleu, Paris, Bloud,
series Science ei Religion, 364; O. Zimmermann, “ Die neue Theosophie,” in Stimmen aus Maria-L.aach, 1910, x., 3S7-400, 479-495;
R. P. Clarke, “What is Theosophy?” The Month, Jan. 1892, p. r ;
“The Marvels of Theosophy,” ib., Feb., p. 173; “The True
Character of Theosophy,”?^., March, p. 321 ; G. Busnelli, Manuale di
Teosofia, 1, Rome, 1910.
�35]
Theosophy
3
him.1 He was made, however, first President of the
Theosophical Society, founded in New York 17th
November 1875, and certainly displayed extraordinary
talents for organization and popular propaganda.
The infant Society, however, was soon all but wrecked ;
for though it existed professedly to combat spirit
ualism equally with materialism, and to propagate
belief in the existence of the Eastern lore and sages,
it made use of not a few of the methods, and ex
perienced certain of the phenomena, of Spiritualism.
H. S. O. and H. P. B. (as it is the curious but convenient
custom of Theosophists to designate their founders)
went later on to India, where the revelations of 18841885 (infra, p. 23) were, as was quite frankly admitted,
“ a tremendous blow.”2 H. P. B. retired into tern porary
privacy, but retrieved her position and remained the
“ heart and soul of the Society ” till her death, which
took place in London, 8th May 1891. This date,
known as the White Lotus Day, is observed by social
and artistic celebrations.
This extraordinary woman, whose magnificent and
scowling features have become famous in three con
tinents, was possessed of startling talents, unlimited
audacity, and above all (we surmise) of that personal
magnetism so noticeable in all leaders of men. Her
great books, The Secret Doctrine (3 vols.), The Key
to Philosophy, Isis Unveiled? etc., and her many articles
■* “ Psychologized baby,” she calls him, Proceedings of the Societyfor
Psychical Reseaich, ix. ; London, 1885, p. 331.
2 Review of Reviews, iii. 5 56. In H. P. B. and the Masters of Wisdom :
A Detailed Examination of the Coulomb Affair, and the S.P.R. Report,
Mrs. Besant attempts a “ complete defence” of H. P. B., who had been
detected, it was generally held, in wholesale “ faking” of occult pheno
mena. Cf. too Isis and the Mah&tmas, ~W. Q. Judge, London, 1895
(his defence) ; and Isis very much Unveiled, F. E. Garrett, ib., 1895 (this
title is based on Mme. Blavatsky’s Isis Unveiled, first published in
1875, 2 vols., and lately reprinted). Cf. App. D.
3 Obtainable from the Theosophical Publishing Society (T.P.S.), 161
New Bond St., W. They are confessedly in great measure “a mosaic
of unacknowledged quotations.”
�4
The History of Religions
[35
in accredited magazines, carried her influence even
where her restless personal activity never reached.
Her information was encyclopedic, but altogether
confused, inaccurate, and at the mercy of her riotous
imagination.
,
(ii) We draw the following outline of Mrs. Besant s
life from her own Autobiography (Fisher Unwin,
1893); this shall be our excuse for the singularly
intimate character of its details. Born in London on
1 st October 1847, she united in herself Irish “other
worldliness” (“three-quarters of my blood and all
my heart”) with Devonshire common-sense. Her
father, apparently once a Catholic, grew to “detest”
all positive creed, and partly “ rationalized
her
mother’s “dainty and well-bred piety.” Annie Wood
was “too religious,” “stuff of which fanatics are
made.” She nearly became a Catholic (p. 24)Angels, fairies, “ Roman judges and Dominican in
quisitors,” Jesus, her “ ideal Prince,” haunted a child
hood narrated with singular affection and sympathy,
softening its austere Evangelical setting. Trained to
increasing independence, her girlhood yet became
intensely ritualist: she studied Keble and the Fathers,
fasted, scourged herself; grew mystically enamoured
of the Crucifix, though, in the Holy Week of 1866,
the “discrepancies” of the Gospel Passion-histories
chilled her with a first doubt. In 1867 she “drifts”
into marriage with the Rev. F. Besant, who asked a
submissiveness she could not give. Personal suffering ;
quarrels; sickness of her children ; the unromantic
duties of a home,—all this initiated a “struggle, of
three years and two months ” from which, after facing
suicide, she will emerge an “ atheist.
Her religious
doubts increase: she leaves her husband:, legal
separation will follow: she earns a miserable pittance
as a cook, governess, and nurse. Voysey and Stanley
replace the Puseyite directors. Now she studies at
the British Museum, and writes heterodox pamphlets.
�35]
Theosophy
5
She has abandoned prayer, and “ God fades out of
the daily life of those who never pray.” In 1874 she
makes acquaintance with Charles Bradlaugh. The
title “atheist” becomes for her the “ Order of Merit
of the world’s heroes”: the “Man of Sorrows” is
rejected for the “Ideal Man,” the “Hercules of
Grecian art,” the “free man who knows no Jaw.”
Faith in evolution shows her the “ sources of evil and
the method of its extinction ” : strong in this “ creed ”
and “ethical programme,” she lives happily from
1874 to 1886, and, “with some misgivings,” to 1899.
Meanwhile she lectures and writes on social, political,
and free-thought topics with that vivacity, force, and
personal communication which everywhere won for
her enthusiastic devotion, where it did not inflame
slander, abuse, prosecution, and even personal attack.
She warmly defended Malthusian principles, and was
legally deprived of the custody of her daughter, as
she had been of her little son’s; she “ almost went
mad.” Chapter X. is well entitled “At War All
Round.” After a stormy transit through socialist
propaganda (which involved a tragic break with
Bradlaugh, whose political position she now ham
pered, not helped), the dream of a brotherhood,
or “ New Church,” dawns for her. “ Since 1886 there
had been slowly growing up a conviction that my
philosophy was not sufficient.” Psychology, hypnotic
experiments, “ fact after fact came hurtling in.” “ Into
the darkness shot a ray of light—A. P. Sinnett’s
Occult World.” She experiments with spiritualism:
the phenomena are “ found to be real.” One evening,
“ a voice that was later to become the holiest sound
on earth ” bids her take courage, light is near.
After a fortnight Mr. Stead offers her “two large
volumes ” to review: they are H. P. B.’s Secret Doc
trine. A miracle takes place. She is introduced
to Mme. Blavatsky: struggles against her fascination;
yields; on 10th May 1889 is admitted as Fellow of
�6
The History of Religions
[35
the Theosophical Society. She sees that “science”
can answer the Why ? of nothing, though the How ?
of much. Experience, intuition, alone suffice, and
these are hers. Her secularist friends—Bradlaugh
soberly, Foote bitterly—denounce her; but the new
storms are soon over. Since then she has found
“ peace” in the absorbing interests of Theosophist
propaganda or contemplation. Established at the
ancient religious centre, Benares, she was visited, and
her romantic seclusion described, by M. P. Loti, in
his idealizing romance, LTnde sans les Anglais ; vers
Benares, c. vi., 1903. Her warm and frank, impulsive
yet loyal character will charm and win many who
are far from holding her doctrines ; her enthusiasm,
versatility, and organizing power will long assure her
crowds of devoted followers.
(iii) The “ T.S.”—'The Theosophical Society was,
as we have said, founded in New York on 17th Novem
ber 1875. Its objects are:—
1. To form the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood of Hu
manity, without distinction of race, creed, sex, caste, or
colour.
2. To promote the study of Aryan and other Eastern literatures,
religions, and sciences.1
3. To investigate unexplained laws of nature and the psychical
powers of man.
The head-quarters are at Adyar, a suburb of
Madras. To become a member, all one need do is
to give in one’s name (the question of subscriptions
appears to be variously answered according to time
and place) with the intention of studying Oriental
literature, though Mrs. Besant declares that the first
object alone is obligatory. The Fellows or members
may be “ attached ” (to national branches) or “ unat
tached ” (having their, diploma from Adyar). They
may be of any religion or philosophy they like. At
1 So Key, Appendix, 308. But this curious formula elsewhere, and
more reasonably, reads: “To encourage the study of comparative
religions, of philosophy and of science. ”
�35]
Theosophy
7
first, a second group existed termed esoteric,. definitely
accepting the esoteric philosophy, believing in the
existence of the “ Masters” and in H. P. B. their mes
senger. In 1890 this “ esoteric ” group was christened
The Oriental School of Theosophy, and above both
groups exist the “Masters,” in their mysterious
seclusion in Thibet.
Its tremendous propaganda succeeds best in the
East. Buddhists and Brahmins, Parsees more re
cently and even Islam, have been reached by it.
Christian missionaries (infra, p. 21, n. 1) have felt its
active enmity.1 Reading clubs, study clubs, groups,
centres, “lodges,” are units of propaganda. The
first International Congress was held in Amsterdam
in 1904. The Theosophist (international in varying
forms), The Vahan, The Lotus Journal (for children),
T.P.S. Book Notes, Orpheus (an Art quarterly), are
the best-known English publications: we could make
a long list (about 50) of foreign bulletins. In Ger
many (which has some 10 magazines), Dr. Rudolf
Steiner is particularly zealous in organizing public
conferences and discussions. Mrs. Besant’s Order
of Service (1908) connects the T. S. with social
effort.1
2
The T.S. has its motto : No Religion is Higher, than
Truth ; and its badge: a serpent with its tail in its
mouth makes a circle, within which two intertwined
triangles, white and black, enshrine the crux ansata
(4jL), the ankh or “ life ” hieroglyphic of Egypt. In a
ring above is seen the Swastika cross
1 Bombay Examiner, 1903, 222. Katholische Missionen, xxxiii.,
Freiburg, I9O4-— 5> P* 4^ ? P. Suau, Linde Tamoule, Paris, 19m, p»
113• •
1
2 We cannot pretend the sections of this immense organization work
in perfect harmony. In Germany there are those who say, I am of
Lehmann, I of Muller, and I of Schulze. One group wishes to see the
movement rationalized ; another, moralized ; others are independents.
But this was inevitable.
�8
The History of Religions
[35
II. The Doctrines of Theosophy
The name Theosophy is no modern formation.
Ammonius Sakkas, father of Neoplatonism (cf. App.
B), claimed to have invented it, and since his time it
has often been used to describe the doctrine of an im
mediate intuition of the Divine Nature and of all things
only in their relation to it.1 From his time Theosophy
has always had its adepts, through the mediaeval
mystics, like Tauler and Eckhart, through the “ illu
minist” schools of contemplation, through J. Bohme
to Swedenborg. And throughout it has attracted
minds (we shall see) possessed by the more unwhole
some fascination of magic and the occult: the
degenerate Gnostics and Neoplatonists, the Kabbalists,
renaissance figures like Cornelius Agrippa and
“ Paracelsus.” Pico della Mirandola was a modern
ized Neoplatonist.
The occultist passion of the
Templars and the Masons descend to the Rosicrucians
of the nineteenth-century revival, to the “unknown
philosopher,” L. C. de S. Martin, “ Eliphaz Levi ” (the
ex-Abbd Constant), “Papus” (Dr Encausse), etc.
etc.2 But, through Philonic Alexandrianism and the
Gnostics, through isolated figures like Apollonius of
Tyana (p. 23, n. 2 ; App. C), through schools of thought
like some sects of Buddhism, the ideal of “ contempla1 So Brucker, in his great Critical History of Philosophy, vol. iv.,
parti., p. 645, Leipzig, 1766: The Theosophists, “that strange brood
of philosophers,” “unite in boasting that they are possessed of a divine
and superhuman wisdom.” So for Kant (Works, iii., 470, Leipzig,
1838 ; Schelling, Collected Works, I. x., 184, Stuttgart, i86i)the essence
of Theosophy is the immediate intuition of God and of all things in
Him.
2 The T.P. S. finds it worth while to advertise the works of St. John
of the Cross, St. Peter of Alcantara, Juliana of Norwich, SS. Francis of
Sales and of Assisi, Michael Molinos, Mme. Guyon, Tolstoy, Walter
Hilton ; the Imitation; of Anglican thinkers like Dr. Inge, Archdeacon
Wilberforce; of liberal scholars like Wrede, A. Meyer ; the famous
Hibbert volume, Jesus or Christ? Its ideal of Christian “mysticism”
is comprehensive. For tenth-century Jewish Theosophy, see the admir
able article of Dr. C. D. Ginsburg, “ Kabbalah,” Enc. Brit., 9th ed.,
xiii., 8j.od-8j.4a.
�Theosophy
35]
9
tion ” seeks back to the oldest philosophies of Hinduism
and the Brahmins.1
Of this continuous and comprehensive history
modern Theosophy makes its peculiar boast.
For the whole notion of Theosophy is that it is a
Divine Science, one and complete, existing from and
to eternity, known in its entirety only by a mysterious
Confraternity of Masters, handed down from genera
tion to generation of these Masters, and revealed by
them to successive centuries in such measure and
beneath such symbols as shall seem best suited to
the assimilative capacity of each. Thus Theosophy
is that Wisdom which is the source of all religions, all
philosophies, all science.
1 Hence Theosophical libraries contain much work on Oriental
religions and ethnology that is excellent, and good translations of
Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Plato, Plotinus, and the like. This too. is
why that distinguished Indian scholar, P. Oltramare, can call his studies
of ancient Indian thought IIHistoire des idtes thtosoph/iques dans
I Inde, I., La thLosophie brahmanique (Paris, 1907). But he apologizes
for the distrust his title cannot but excite, nowadays especially, when
“that title {Theosophy} is affixed to the strangest wares : an amalgam
of mysticism, charlatanism, and thaumaturgic pretensions which have
been combined, in the most unlikely fashion, with an almost childish
anxiety to apply the method and terminology of science to transcendent
matters. India itself could not but be besmirched by the ridicule and
disfavour so justly incurred by the curious doctrines of Mme. Blavatsky
and Mrs. Besant” (pp. ii, iii). M. Paul Carty competently contrasts
{Flades, cxv., 1908, 774-787) M. Oltramare’s work with Mrs. Besant’s
singularly unscientific study of Indian religions {Four Great Religions:
Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Christianity, and The Religious
Problem in India: Lectures on Islam, Jainism, Sikhism, and Theosophy,
combined in a French translation, Les religions pratiquies actiiellement
dans IInde, 1907). But, unfortunately, she can always appeal to the secret
history, the occult tradition which she has received from its Oriental
guardians, and, with regard to the origin, development, interrelation,
meaning, and value of these cults, announce to her Eastern (and even
Western) disciples conclusions at which, she frankly confesses, all normal
science scoffs. In this series see especially on Brahminism, Leet. IV.,
3-5; on Hinduism, Leet. V., pp. 6, IT, 27-30; on Buddhism,
Leet. IV., 7-29, n. b. 11-18; on Nirvana, Leet. XXXIV., pp. 13-31,
n. b. pp. 18, 21, 27-29; cf. IV., 26-28; Leet. III., 26, 27. On
Manicheism, Leet. XX., 5, 6 ; on Gnosticism and Neoplatonism, pp.
28, 29 of this paper. On the peculiar tendencies of decadent paganism,
Leet. XI., 28-30 ; XIV., 8, 18, 20-26, 29 ; XVI., 21.
35
1*
�IO
The History of Religions
[35
Of these Guardians of the Immemorial Doctrine, M. A.
Arnould (President of the French branch of the T.S.) writes (in
Les Croyances Fondamentales du Bouddhisme, Paris, 1895) that
“ their number is great” (p. 6), that they are “ Beings more com
pletely developed or evolved than antecedent or existing
humanity. These more advanced Beings have traversed the
entire human course, and help their less advanced brethren.
All humanity shall one day reach this degree of wisdom and
development, like that which Westerns assign to their anthropo
morphic God,” and then it will be their turn to help others
(pp. 15, 16). For while “a few isolated individuals, borne on by
a peculiar enthusiasm, a spiritual, moral, and physical hygiene
(infra., p. 18, n. 2) and persevering toil,” achieve the goal before
their brothers (p. 46), and alone have evolved that sixth principle,
or Buddhi, which is as superior to the intellect as the human
soul is to the animal (p. 66), yet they can and do put off their
entry into Nirvana for the sake of teaching fragments of their
lore to men, and may then be called Buddhas of Compassion
(p. 49 : cf. Leet. XXXIV., 27 ; IV., 26). Since the whole value
of Theosophy as a system imposed by authority rests upon the
character of these Mahatmas ( = “great spirits”), it were well
to be sure at least of their existence. They live, we are told,
in Thibet. H. P. B., A. B., and humbler apostles have been in
communication with them, epistolary and otherwise. The
“ metaphysical necessity” of their existence is proved by “ Hera ”
in the Lotus Bleu for September 1904, pp. 193-199. It is
postulated by the Law of Cyclic Evolution. The divine germ
in man comes from and returns to God, through an uninterrupted
series of more or less divine Beings. There cannot, therefore,
but be Mahatmas. The Lamas of Thibet have, however, denied
their existence {Month, lxxiv., 1892, p. 333); Mr. Hodgson
{P.S.P.R., ix., 1891, 312) will not admit it either. To those who
do not grant its a priori necessity, the evidence of the few
“eye-witnesses” seems, he argues, valueless: and so is the
correspondence by which they, mistakenly enough, reveal their
“miserably poor style ” and ideas which are “absolute rubbish.”1
1 Month, Ixxiv., p. 180. H. P. B. {Key to Theosophy, 1889, pp.
288-303, 215) rationalizes the Mahatmas not a little: the T.S., she
says, despises the attacks of the S. P.R.—“a flock of stupid old British
wethers, who had been led to butt at them by an over-frolicksome
lambkin from Australia” (p. 297). The Masters, though they guide
and protect, do not inspire the T.S. nor the writings of its leaders
(p. 299). So too Mrs. Besant {Introd. a la Thios., tr., Paris, 1903, p. 20):
they work for humanity, use the T.S. as an instrument, bless it and
help it at a crisis. “They have been called Initiates, Adepts, Magi,
Hierophants, Mahatmas, Elder Brothers, Masters ” {ib.). But the name
�35]
Theosophy
11
We see then in what sense it can be both affirmed
and denied that Theosophy is a religion.
Theosophy is not a religion.
But something of Theosophy can be found under all religious
symbols, in all religious dogmas, for the good reason that it is
the Religion-Science whence have issued all religions and all
sciences (A. Amould, op. cit., p. 5).
To the question “Is Theosophy a religion?” “It is not,”
answers H. P. B. (cf. Key to Theosophy, p. 1). “It is Divine
Knowledge or Science.” Similarly, “ it is the doctrinal exposition
of the Truths demonstrated by OCCULT SCIENCE” (Arnould, p. 6 :
we carefully respect italics and capitals).
But a fuller definition will be available when we
have examined its doctrine of God, the Universe
and Man.
GOD.—“Do you believe in God—the God of the Christians,
the Biblical God?” “In such a God iye do not believe. We
reject the notion of a personal, or an extra-cosmic and anthropo
morphic God. The God of theology is a bundle of contra
dictions. We will have nothing to do with him.” “Then you
are Atheists?” “ Not that we know of. We believe in a Divine
Universal Principle, the root of ALL, from which all proceeds,
and within which all shall be absorbed at the end of the great
cycle of Being. Our DEITY is everywhere, in, over, and around
every invisible atom and divisible molecule; for IT is the
mysterious power of evolution and involution, the omnipresent,
omnipotent, and even omniscient creative potentiality. IT does
not (think); because it is Absolute Thought itself. Nor does it
exist, as it is Be-ness, not a Being. Our Deity is the eternal,
incessantly evolving, not creating builder of the universe; that
matters little. Alas that among the initiates we are told to collect
Pythagoras, Orpheus, Moses, Christ, St. Paul and St.John, Clement and
Origen, Krishna and Buddha, all the high priests of so many different
cults, including those of the Temple at Jerusalem, and Alexander the
Great (Arnould, op. cit., pp. 17—19), though his was but an inferior grade,
and H. P. B. calls him (Key, p. 289) a “ drunken soldier.” It must be
remembered, whenever Theosophy contrasts its strictly “rational”
system with the “ blind faith” of the Christian (e.g. Key, 218), that the
system still reposes on the testimony of those (for Europeans, almost
exclusively H. P. B. and H. S. O.) who say they have been in communica
tion with the Mahatmas, and have received, understood, and divulgated
their doctrine.
�12
The History of Religions
[35
universe itself unfolding out of its own essence. It is a sphere
without circumference—ITSELF.” (H. P. B., Key, 61-66.)?
The Universe.—It is clear, however, that this All
is not inert. But whether the universe emanates from
God (as “ray from sun”), or is “immanent” in Him
(as “ drop in ocean ”), or is Himself (as my dream is
me), is nowhere definitely exposed. And no wonder,
since metaphors confound the clearest thought. Still,
it is to idealistic Pantheism, as we know it, that Theo
sophy inclines. There is no creation, but
“periodical and consecutive appearances of the universe from
the subjective on to the objective plane of being.” This is the
“ Cycle of Life,” the “ Days and Nights of Brahma,” or the time
of Manwantara and that of Pralaya (dissolution). (This process
is) Eternal reality casting a periodical reflection of itself on the
infinite spatial depths. This reflection “is a temporary illusion,
and, as flitting personalities, so are we ” {Key, pp. 83-85). “ In
Eternity,” M. Arnould reminds us (p. 12), “there is but a single
moment, ALWAYS. If, for a single moment, there had been
nothing, there would always have been Nothing. Before
creation, as after, is Eternity 1 Where seize, where place, the
moment of Creation? It exists not! It cannot exist! The
periods (of activity and rest) can be compared to the double
rhythmic beating of the heart. There is a great rhythmic
throbbing in the Infinite, in the Unique All, which causes
transitory forms to emanate, wherethrough the Unique Spirit
circulates and develops and reabsorbs them.” 2
1 There is here, at the outset, confusion of thought. H. P. B. has
not grasped the notion of analogy; she thinks that because “theo
logians say God s nature transcends the Cosmos, they exclude it from
the Cosmos; that because they own their idea of Him is anthropo
morphic, their definition of His nature is : that because they say He has
all the perfections of a person, therefore He has all the limitations of
personality as we experience it. On human knowledge of the Divine
Essence, r/i Leet. XX. (St. Augustine), pp. 14, 26; and XXII.
(Aquinas), 10-12, 21-27. Mrs. Besant, in a lecture given in London on
1st July 1904, exposed the theosophic mode of Pantheism, as is her wont,
m terms far more reverent and sympathetic to English hearers. Yet the
theology of Theosophy, she frankly declares, is 1 Pantheist. God is all,
11
and all is God.” {Cf “ Theosophy” in Relig. Systems of the World, p.
642, London, 1903 ; and Why I became a Theosophist, ib., 1891, p. 18.)
A Manvantara, we may add, comprises 360,000,000 years, and,
together with a Pralaya, composes the 100 billions (and more) years of
�35]
Theosophy
13
Mrs. Besant develops this : The Universe is created
by the emanation of the great breath of the Unity.
The LogcA or Word, leaping from the Silence, is a
first Trinity in a triple aspect: the First is a Substance
not to be conceived nor imagined ; the Second, Spirit
in matter, energy in form, etc., at the root of all that
is on its way to existence, essence of spirit, essence
of matter, still inconceivable by our intelligence.
The Third aspect is intelligence, universal conscious
ness, existence within the limits of the manifested.
One Logos pervades the whole, from the highest
spirit to the tiniest grain of sand (fntr., p. 21). And
in the lecture above quoted she reminds the Bishop
of London that Theosophists do indeed believe in the
Trinity, inasmuch as Logos is the name they give
to the nature of God as manifest, a triple Logos,
appearing first as “Will, root of existence”; second,
as “ Divine Wisdom, knowledge inspired by love ” ;
and thirdly, as “ Creative Activity, Creator Spirit,
immanent in all matter and form.”1
The world consists of seven interpenetrating planes,
the physical, the astral,the mental, the Buddhi, Nirvana,
a world period, or Kalpah. During a Pralaya (putting the thing in its
Indian form) only Brahma (neuter) exists—Sat, the Unknowable and
Absolute. A new Manvantara dawns: Brahma (masc.) awakes. At
once He sees, “Nothing exists.” Forthwith we have the opposition
of Being and Not Being, the Duality, sat-avidya. The vision of the
“being” that once was recurs to Him—Brahma’s own revelation,
Mahcit, the third “logos.” The Trinity, Sat, Sat-avidya, Mahat, is
complete. The out- and in-breathings of Brahma then make and
reabsorb the Universe. Zimmermann, op. cit., p. 391 ; cf. J. C.
Chatterji, Der Pfad der Vervollkommnung, Leipzig, p. 14.
1 Below this purer form of divine activity comes a hierarchy of lesser
spirits, the “gods” of Hindu, Chaldean, and Egyptian religions; the
Archangels of the Christians ; the Lords, Planetary Spirits, of “esoteric
philosophy”; for they preside over the evolution of worlds, construct
universes, direct cosmic forces. Lesser gods, “angels,” Elementals
(of a lofty kind) steer the forces of Nature on a lower plane, till we
reach those baser sprites that occult lore and magic can control. The
Roman Church has forgotten less than the others of the stored science,
on these points, of Christian Fathers and their contemporaries (ib.,
p. 21 sqq., etc.). Qi Appendices, and p. 24, n. 2.
�14
The History of Religions
[35
Parinirveina and Mahaparinirvana planes (those, that
is, of Enlightenment, of Nirvana, of full, of great-full
Nirvana. Each has its special dimension, time, con
sciousness, inhabitants. To the first belong minerals
and plants ; to the astral, animals and most men, who
are in time, however, to achieve the seventh. “ Spirit” is
for the Theosophist, however, only the purer manifesta
tion of That of which “matter” is the grosser.1
1 Into the fantastic history of this evolving and involving world we
really cannot go. It rises in a septuple spiral, mankind passing through
seven cycles corresponding to the planets. Earth-men are on the 4th ;
from Venus 18 million years ago ants and bees, etc., reached us. Each
cycle contains seven races, destined to evolve into man. In the lost con
tinent of Lemuria lived our third race, where reason first dawned. In
Atlantis, now sunk beneath the ocean, lived the fourth race, some 70,000
years after the collapse of Lemuria ; it had a high culture and knew
about aviation. The Atlanteans, who perished some 850,000 years
ago, were giants, also dwarfs ; its members were brown, red, yellow,
white, or black. It is from them that we Aryans have inherited their
precious knowledge of the hidden virtues of gems, etc., of chemistry,
or rather of ‘ ‘ alchemy, mineralogy, geology, physics, and astronomy ”
(H. P. B., Secret Doctrine). H. P. B. pitilessly scoffs at palaeontologists
who deny these things ; and H. S. O., in Theospphy, Religion, and Occult
Science, 72, at the “ abysmal ignorance’’ of Western science, formed in
the school of “ Mill, Darwin, Tyndall, Schlegel, and Burnouf.” Yet
Mrs. Besant {Introd., p. 16) finds the true successors of the Sages (whom
Plato and Pythagoras drew from) in Giordano Bruno, the “second
Pythagoras ” ; in Fichte, Kant, and Schopenhauer ; Emerson, Berkeley;
Bohme, Fludd, and Swedenborg. However, the development of the
5th Aryan race, of which we are, began 1,000,000 years ago, and in
Europe is, from a religious, philosophic, philanthropic point of view, in
a cul-de-sac. Better things, indeed, may be hoped in America. The
6th root-race of our cycle, as Leadbeater has “ established,”is due about
700 years hence. See C. W. Leadbeater, The Astral Plane: Its Scenery,
Inhabitants, and Phenomena. The Devachanic Plane or HeavenWorld. An Outline of Theosophy • A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism.
The Occult World; J. Donelly, Atlantis, the Antediluvian World.
The Canaries and Azores are the highest peaks of Atlantis: Lemuria
stretched from Mozambique to Australia. Leadbeater knows the very
diet of the 6th root-race—it will largely consist of a sort of blanc-mange
(surely a depressing prospect, though its colour and taste will vary).
Food is partaken of in gardens; there are no chairs, but marble
depressions in the soil; the plates too are marble, and the whole is
flooded after each repast (cf Zimmermann, l.c., p. 393, n. 1). See too
W. Scott Elliot, The Lost Lemuria (with maps); The Story of Atlantis
(four maps). M. Saunier, Llgende d. symboles philosophiques, religietix et ma^onniques, Paris, 1911.
�35]
Theosophy
15
Man.—Man, the Microcosm, is himself septuple,
four parts composing the physical, three the spiritual,
man. The following is H. P. B.’s chart {Key, p. 91)
'(a) Rupa, or Sthula Sharira.
T) Prana.
(r) Linga Sharira.
(d) Kama rupa.
(2. Manas—a dual principle in
its functions.
(/) Buddhi.
fg^Atma.
(a) Physical body.
(£) Life, or Vital Principle.
(c) Astral body.
(d) The seat of animal de
sires and passions.
2. Mind, intelligence, the
higher human mind,
whose light or radia
tion links the Monad,
for the lifetime, to the
mortal man.
(/) The Spiritual Soul.
(g) Spirit.
The first four “principles” compose a man’s Per
sonality, the last three his Individuality. The Atma,
H. P. B. says, is “ one with the Absolute”; Sinnett, that
it is matter like the rest, only very subtle. Arnould
(who describes all this pp. 63-67) prudently exclaims,
“ Quant au septiemeprincipe, Atmd, rien parions pas.”
At death, the first four principles, or rather “ states of
consciousness,” evanesce : the one real man, immortal
in essence, if not in form, Manas, embodied con
sciousness {Key, p. 100), “God fallen into matter”
(A. B., Introd., p. 27), alone will subsist.
All human evolution is the effort of “this God” to
reascend to its proper plane, taking with it (for by
purification this is possible) as much of its personality
as it can redeem. But since this ascent is impossible
in the space of one “ life,” reincarnations are necessary,
the Manas plunging into matter, God being manifest
in flesh, only to return to the Devachan or heaven
plane where, during a disincarnate existence of (on
an average) 1500 years,1 it assimilates experiences
1 On this cf. Key, section ix., 143-171 5 but also 88-97, I23~I37.
R. Steiner, quoted by Zimmermann, p. 395, n. I, says incarnation usually
takes place twice in 2100 years, once in male, once in female form.
�16
The History of Religions
[35
achieved, concludes thought-processes begun, gathers
up into its simple self the results of its double selfhood
when incarnate. The Devachan plane is happy, rich,
and conscious, but is still the domain of illusion, and
even this is not reached at once.
KARMA.—The nature of this Devachan is rigorously
determined for each by the law of Karma. This
means, in brief, the absolutely determinist succession
of cause and effect throughout the entire world
process and the whole history of man’s soul. “ The
guilty must suffer,” said /Eschylus. And “ as a man
soweth, so shall he reap.”
It is the universal law of retributive justice ; it represents
Ultimate Deity, and can, therefore, have neither wrath nor
mercy, only absolute Equity, which leaves every cause, great
or small, to work out its inevitable effects; the Ultimate
law of the Universe. All great social evils, distinction of
classes; and of the sexes ; the unequal distribution of capital
and of labour,—all are due to Karma. Hence a national or
social Karma grows out of the aggregate of individual Karmas
{Key, 198-215).
In consequence, there is no room for regret, hope,
repentance, atonement, prayer.
It can neither be propitiated, nor turned aside by prayer.
We do not believe in vicarious atonement, nor in the possibility
of the remission of the smallest sin by any god. What we
believe in, is strict and impartial justice. [This is the sense in
which Karma is “Relative and Distributive,” a law of readjust
ment giving back Harmony (which is synonymous with Good) to
the world.] There is no repentance (here we resume H. P. B.’s
quotations from standard works): no “ casting our sins at the
foot of the Cross.” “ There is no destiny but what we ourselves
determine; no salvation or condemnation except what we
ourselves bring about.” Weak natures may accept the “easy
truth of vicarious atonement, intercession, forgiveness ” {Key,it.}.
“Do you ever pray?” “We do not, we act.” “Pray!”
(Buddhists would exclaim) “to whom, or to what?” (yet they are
confessedly far more virtuous than Christians {Key, 66-74).1
1 Yet H. P. B. believes in “will-prayer,” an “ internal command ” to
“ Our Father in heaven ” in its esoteric meaning, i.e. in man himself,
for man is “ God,” and not a God. The inner man is the only God we
can have cognizance of... a deific essence. It does not listen to, nor is
�35]
Theosophy
17
It must be confessed that this doctrine has to be
singularly modified in view of the irreducible human
conviction that man has free-will; can modify, by
deliberate acts, the cause and effect series of his life :
that is, that he can lift himself above, or let himself
sink below, the downward or upward tendency which
(in mechanical logic) can alone result from that sum
total of his bad, or good, actions in the past, which is
Karma. Mrs. Besant, in the lecture quoted above,
actually finds room for the Christian dogma of Re
demption, at least in the “ Broad Church ” sense,
which is not the “juridical concept” of Anselm (cf.
Leet. XX., 29) (in which Christ is substituted for the
sinner), still less the (falsely so-called) Early Christian
notion (Christ is a ransom for man to Satan, ib., 30),
but an “ at-one-ment” made between man and God
in the revelation of Love shown in the person of Jesus.
Frederick Denison Maurice, F. W. Robertson of
Brighton, are here her patrons; Mr. R. J. Campbell
would have been, had she spoken in the days of the
New Theology. Christ has Divinity within Himself:
so have we, but weakened, dormant. By contact with
Him, it awakes, unites itself with Him ; our spirit
distinct from, either finite man or the infinite essence—for all are one.
(Thus this will-power is a sheer force bringing about physical results.
All “ petition prayer” kills self-reliance ; ib.) It will be remembered
that this doctrine is romantically put in Sir E. Arnold’s Light oj Asia,
and more morosely in the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. Mrs. Besant
characteristically softens this doctrine for English ears, though con
fessing that the advancing Theosophist passes naturally from petition to
contemplation ; angels or inferior powers may grant our baser requests :
every heart-beat in man has its necessary repercussion in God ; but the
more perfectly spiritual the human effort, the deeper into the divine All
does it reach, the more immediately (in human or Christian language)
into God’s heart. The league of the Golden Chain for children of
seven years and upwards, exhorts children on rising to recite, and take
as motto for the day, the formula, “ I am a link in the Golden Chain of
Love, which extends over the whole world. (I will try to think, speak,
and do, thoughts, words, and actions, clean and fair.) May every link
in the Golden Chain be bright and strong.” Children have for them
First Steps in Theosophy (by E. M. Mallet): A Golden Afternoon: The
Golden Stairs, and Other Songs, etc. Cf. infra, p. 18, n. 2.
�18
The History of Religions
[35
becomes His—Him—that is, God. Thus His own
prayer is accomplished, and we and He and the
Father are one.1
But in general this question is linked up with the
whole of Theosophic Ethic and Asceticism.
MORALITY.—This, naturally, may be self-regarding
or social, and the latter aspect is emphasized in
Theosophy, where in a physical sense one life
circulates through the whole universe ; nay, our uni
versal brotherhood is not still to be achieved, nor
perfected, still less is a metaphor, but is a substantial
fact. Directly the fleeting elements of the lower
man are recognized as such, and when he sees that the
body is but a “ sheath ” to the “ inner, truer man,”
the true Theosophist will not macerate, cut, or burn
the body, but “ de-animalize ” it by abstinence as far
as possible from food, at any rate from meat. But
there are no “hard-and-fast obligations”: even wine
and spirits—“ only less destructive than the habitual
use of hashish, opium, and other drugs”—are not
absolutely forbidden. Similarly marriage will, by
those who aim at the highest goal, be abandoned, for
the plain reason that “ no man can serve two masters ” ;
it is impossible for him to “ divide his attention
between the pursuit of occultism and a wife ” {Key,
258, 263).
Needless to say, this is but “exoteric” reasoning.
The Enlightened see that but one Soul exists in the
evolving All, and will not dream of sacrificing the life
of the meanest of their brethren, beast or fowl or fish.2
1 This version is a frank concesssion to English prejudice. Cf infra,
pp. 21, n. I ; 24, and supra, pp. 12, n. I ; 13.
2 Anna Kingsford writes The Perfect Way in Diet; Mrs. Besant,
Against Vivisection’ The Influence of Alcohol; H. Reinheimer, Nutri
,
tion and Evolution ; nor is Mr. Eustace Miles’s name absent. The Yoga
discipline (the lower nathayoga, and the royal r&jayoga} educates a man
to that full detachment which takes him quicker out of the wheel of
re-births. Special attitudes of neck and back, that the vital currents
may circulate properly, are advised ; concentration of the thought upon
the solar plexus, or on a pleasing and simple form such as a lotus or
�35]
Theosophy
19
But the essence of Theosophic Ethic is Altruism,
though in a sense this is a misnomer, since ultimately
we all are One. The only evil is Individualism; the
supreme good, all that makes for Unity. Really, “ I am
you, and you I ” (Arnould, p. 39) ; we are distinguished
only as drops in the ocean, as a ray broken in a
prism.
Hence, tolerance, sympathy, forgiveness,
social effort are essentials to the Theosophic life;
hence the supreme sacrifice of those made perfect,
who put off their reward for the sake of suffering,
backward humanity (see Key, 263-271); freedom and
unselfishness are the ideal of education.
It is in this way alone that we ultimately achieve
Nirvana. As the Theosophist treatment of this
notion adds nothing to that of the Buddhists, and
detracts in no way from its inherent difficulties, we
are content to refer the reader to the passages already
indicated, in Leet. IV. We must in loyalty remind
ourselves that any interpretation of Nirvana which
makes of it annihilation is repudiated by Theosophists. Paradise and Hell, or future rewards and
punishments (in the “ orthodox ” sense, and especially
their “eternity”) “we reject absolutely.” “Nothing
that is finite can remain stationary ”: and that which
begins—eg. our after-life—is finite', therefore it
changes: Spirit can never be reduced to nonentity,
tulip ; regular in- and out-breathings (E. A. Fletcher writes The Laiv
of the Rhythmic Breath} ; the solemn pronunciation of the mystic
syllable OM,—all this makes for progressive spiritualization, till a man
becomes a disciple (chela}, fit for the special attention of a Master (guriP).
See A. Besant: The Self and its Sheath: The Path of Discipleship: In
the Outer Court. I translate the following prayer inserted in the
October number of the (German) Theosophie, Leipzig, 1910, at p. 290.
(At each inspiration the first verse is meditated ; at the expiration, the
second):
“ I breathe the breath of Life : I send love to all mankind. I breathe
the life-dispensing ether : I send forth thoughts of life for all mankind.
I breathe the eternal movement of the divine life: I send wishes for
health for all mankind. I breathe the universal Life Spirit, full of
strength : And deny all weakness of Life and of the soul.” And so on,
ending, for Amen, “ So breathes every man that is born of God.’’
�20
The History of Religions
[35
though the “personality” may perish, “ disintegrated
into its particles.” The soul relapses : the Spirit—in
man and in all else—is “ Be-ness,” one, eternal (Key,
109-116). We do not remember our previous incar
nations, for the Ego is furnished in each with a new
body, brain, and memory—a “clean shirt” on which
it were idle to look for blood-spots, though the
murderer may wear it. “ The spiritual Ego can act
only where the personal Ego is paralysed ” ; only “ in
trance ” can servant girls and farm hands “ speak
Hebrew and play the violin” (ib., 127-142). No;
after death, the “ astral eidolons” of the lower Quaternity “ await their second death ” in Kama-loka. The
Kama-rupa phantom, thus bereft of the divine and
thinking principles, unconscious, thoughtless, can be
magnetized towards a “medium,” can actually take
form within his Aura (outside which it must dissolve
and vanish, like jelly-fish outside water), can “live a
kind of vicarious life, through the medium’s brain.”
Hence not even the miscalled “spirits” that return,
prove “memory” in the Departed. Though in the
Devachan plane (supra, p. 15) the Ego has “ unalloyed
happiness, surrounded by everything it had aspired to
in vain, and in the companionship of everyone it loved
on earth,” this is but the supreme illusion, Maya,
the “ ideal efflorescence of all the abstract, therefore
undying and eternal qualities—love and mercy, the
love of the good, the true, the beautiful,” that it had
absorbed by experience before death. The Devachanic Ego is but the “ ideal reflection ” of its old best
self. But in Nirvana there is not even this (ib., 143171).
III. Theosophy and other Religions
We have already seen (p. 11) that Theosophy offers
itself, not as a new religion, but as that supremely
ancient, profound, and universal Knowledge which is
�35]
Theosophy
21
at the root of all religions. Its “ colour ” is, however,
so strongly Oriental, that it has constantly been
confused with Buddhism. Against this it protests.
“ Buddhism,” says Arnould (p. 5), “ is but one of many
‘symbol religions’ which divide the world between
them.” Theosophists are no more Buddhists “than
all musicians are followers of Wagner” {Key, p. 12).
But Theosophists may be called Budhists—Wisdomists—since Buddha, like Christ, taught an esoteric
doctrine, which they hold. Even the “ dead letter ” of
Southern Buddhism is, however, far grander and more
noble, philosophical and scientific, than that of every
other Church or religion (zA, 12—15).1
Still less is Theosophy sheer spiritism, though
1 But, with that adaptability which has marked the T. S. since the
advent of Mrs. Besant, in Ceylon, for instance, Theosophy is profoundly
Buddhized. Cf her Buddhist Popular Lectures, delivered there in 1907.
In Ceylon Buddhist propaganda has been remarkable. In 1845
Buddhism had not a single school there. But Col. Olcott (who, by
the way, in a previous incarnation was King Asoka, cf. Leet. IV., p. 24),
preached temperance there, decrying Catholic schools, persuading the
natives to give money they saved on drink to Buddhist schools. Of
these in 1910 there were 445, of which 206 were Theosophical. There
were 436 Catholic schools, and 891 Prptestant, apportioned between 8
sects. Col. Olcott’s campaign is criticised in C. F. Gordon Cumming’s
Two Happy Years in Ceylon, ii. 413-419. In India, however, the
“ colour ” is Brahmanic. With Mrs. Besant’s help the Central Hindu
College at Benares was founded (cf. the lectures given there, Hindu
Ideals'). It imparts a complete modern and English education (intellectual
and physical), often under English certificated masters and mistresses.
But the religion and philosophy is pure Brahminism. Powerfully
supported, widely imitated, its resistance to Christianity is not only
negative. Mrs. Besant, alarmed at Brahmin conversions at St. Joseph’s
College, Trichinopoly, was making a tour in the south. “ She was
received at Madras like a goddess ; the prime minister of the Rajah
of Mysore had prostrated himself before her as before the incarnation
of the goddess Sarasvati, the goddess of science, wife of Brahma. At
Trichinopoly a crowd of Hindu devotees awaited her at the station.
She was escorted to the National High School, opposite the enemy’s
citadel, St. Joseph’s College. She delivered lecture upon lecture. On
her return home, she continued her pamphlet-campaign. She explained
conversions by the basest motives, called Jesus Christ an incarnation
of Vishnu, and in general fought explicitly and with energy the growing
influence of the missionaries.” (A. Brou, Bulletin des Missions: Eludes,
exxiv., 1910, 261-265.)
�22
The History of Religions
[35
“ spiritualist phenomena, being indubitable and scienti
fically verified (when not just simulated by charlatans),
must be reduced to one of the inferior sections of
Occult Science” (Arnould, ibi). Occult sciences,
H. P. B. insists, do exist, and are most dangerous
(Key, p. 26) ; the reason being, that persons possessed
of a certain amount of control over higher forces use
these awry, because for selfish ends. Spiritist pheno
mena, but not the spiritist explanations, can be
accepted: their theories are “ crude,” their “ bigotry
is blind ” (ib., 25-32); in fact, H. P. B. violently attacks
the “ hatred ” of the Spiritualists, and the “ famous and
infamous attack on the T.S. by the S.P.R.” (p. 273).
“ Every kind of slander, uncharitable personal remarks,
and absurd misrepresentations,” express their “ violent
hatred,” in America, then England, then France
(274-275).1
Here we should perhaps insert a brief note on the marvels of
Theosophy. The facts are disputed, and we do not pretend to
decide on the character, or even the reality, of the phenomena.
Fr. Clarke1 concedes to them a considerable measure of objec
2
tivity. Mrs. Besant, indeed, became a Theosop.hist largely on
their occasion.3 H. S. O. broke with the mediums because he saw
their phenomena equalled and surpassed, at will, and in broad
daylight, by H. P. B. and Eastern adepts. Roses fall from
1 Yet it is deplorable how linked Theosophy seems inevitably to be
with the lowest follies of Occultism. Cf. Occult Chemistry, by A. B.
and C. W. Leadbeater; Thought Forms (with coloured pictures of
forms clairvoyantly seen and “vibratory” figures), by the same; J.
Bertrand, Occultisme Ancien el Moderne, Bloud, 1900, and the ex
tremely rich documentation of Id Occultisme Contemporain, C. Godard,
ib. “ Alan Leo ” writes Astrology for All, How to Judge a Nativity,
The Horoscope in Detail, etc., etc., and offers a “ carefully delineated
horoscope for 5s.” The Kabbalah is an inexhaustible topic for Theosophist writers, and it is melancholy to judge of the confusion of thought
implied by the trash that figures, in their bulletins and advertisements,
alongside of works under distinguished names—Edwin Arnold, A.
Lang, F. W. H. Myers, William James. W. E. Waite is one of the
most prolific writers in this department.
2 Month, 1892, Feb., pp. 173, 391.
8 Why I became a Theosophist, 20-21, etc.
�35]
Theosophy
23
heaven ; letters from distant countries appear in cushions, flutter
from the ceiling; writings appear on slates, or the wall;
paintings emerge, without intervention of hand or brush ; music
resounds without musician ; persons disappear or are material
ized ; a jet-black hair is cut from among blonde tresses.1 We
cannot disguise from ourselves the fact that the “marvels” have
been ever less emphasized : that they are not the essentials of
Theosophy has always been conceded. The writings of H. P. B.
are, in Mrs. Besant’s eyes, the most marvellous of the “ pheno
mena”; or the conversion of A. P. Sinnett. To others, it is
Mrs. Besant’s own conversion that is the miracle par excellence.
But we must be allowed to refer to the Proceedings of the Society
for Psychical Research (vol. iii., parts viii., ix. ; 1885, pp. 201400) for the famous dispute upon the alleged deceits, forgeries,
and trickeries of Mme. Blavatsky, which, it seems clear, un
doubtedly descend to a very low level of imposture. Cf App. D.
Mme. Blavatsky, we saw, speaks roughly of Chris
tianity. Col. Olcott speaks of it as morally corrupt
and spiritually paralysed. M. Arnould considers it
to have narrowed and materialized Buddhism (p. 20).2
Any favour shown to Christianity is based on its
esoteric doctrine, of which creed and cult are mere
1 Cf. op. cit., 46-48, 122-125, especially 251 ; and his very interesting
Old Diary Leaves, especially third series ; and A. P. Sinnett’s Occult
World.
2 To make up. H. P. B. in her Glossary proves the reality of the
miracles of Apollonius of Tyana by a passage from St. Justin. But
not only is the passage falsely attributed to Justin (Otto, Opera
Iustini, iii. 2), but even in its setting it is an objection, which the
supposed Justin refutes! Mrs. Besant reproduces it as decisive
in Theosophy and its Evidences, p. 16. Since A. of T. {cf. Leet. XIV.
21) is so often mentioned by modern Theosophists as a Master, on
a par with Christ, we may mention that he died very old, c. 95 A.D.,
but the first written life we have of him is by Philostratus, not before
200 A.D. It is based on hearsay or untrustworthy documents, is highly
rhetorical, and wholly unscientific.
Little can be deduced with
certainty from it. It is Mr. G. R. S. Mead who is most prolific upon
the early semi-Christian movements, some of which we mention in
Appendices. C/f his Apollonius of Tyana ; Plotinus; Thrice-Greatest
Hermes (Hellenistic Gnosis) ; Echoes from the Gnosis; The World
Mystery). Philostratus (whom Kayser calls a “ Parisian feuilletoniste ”)
causes to J. Reville {Relig. h Rome s. I. Sivlres, 1886, ii. 225) a
“genuine exasperation” as he reads those pages “d’une nullite et
d’une platitude desolantes.” Not that A. is wholly despicable by any
means. But to offer him as a choice specimen of any system is
suicidal.
�24
The History of Religions
[35
symbols.1 We have seen Mrs. Besant trace the Trinity
and Redemption in Theosophy (pp. 13,17). Christ too
she will honour, because “in all the religions of the
world’’ the Second Person of that Trinity incarnates
Himself and reveals Himself as man.
If by “Christ” you mean a Divine Man, then He
is not unique [alas, are we not all Christs, more or
less?]; if you mean the Second Logos,ah, then, adore
Him with all your soul, but remember, your worship
reaches Him whom the Hindu names, and rightly,
Vishnu. And thus Theosophy “ widens our horizons,”
and offers us other Great Masters than the One
believed in, and we see written an Imitation of Buddha,
and of Krishna.
Only the name varies, Mithra,
Krishna, Bacchus, Osiris, Christ; the divine story is
the same in all religions. Confess, above all, com
municate, Mrs. Besant tells the Catholic “disciple.”
“ Hear Mass,” says A. L. B. Hardcastle (Rev. Theos.,
Sept. 1904, 199-205), and explains the “real”—yet
quite un-Catholic—meaning of its ritual.1
23
But, travelling deeper, we find out that the Roman Church
considers Christ (as do the Gnostics) as the chief of the ./Eons
(H. P. B.), and that in any case Christ is triple—the mystic Christ
(symbol of the developed esoteric initiate), the mythical (the sun
god under all his names),and the historical? The historical Christ,
born 105 “b.C. ,” was taught Hebrew by his parents, became an
Essene monk at 12, entered at 19 the monastery of Mount
Serbal, where he found a superb library of occultist books, many
1 Cf. Appendix A.
2 Only we wish he could get it right. The altar-candles are not
lighted after the priest has read, on his knees, a secret confession. We
do not, by blessing salt and water and incense, attribute to them “a sort
of conscious life ” : the “solid marble or wrought metal of the altar-rails ”
is not a “diamond barrier” between exoterist and esoterist. Christ does
not leave His “ Nirvanic consciousness” for the prison of the ciborium ;
nor will we listen to Mr. Currie {Theos. Rev., Aug. 1904) explaining the
esoteric Pater Noster. See especially W. Kingsland, The Esoteric Basis
of Christianity; C. W. Leadbeater, the Christian Creed; A. Besant,
Esoteric Christianity, or the Lesser Mysteries, London, 1901; R. Steiner,
Le mystlre chritien et les mysteres antiques, tr. Scliure, Paris, 1908.
3 Mrs. Besant, Esoteric Christianity, 1901.
�35]
Theosophy
25
of them from Trans-Himalayan India. He retires to Egypt,
enters the esoteric “lodge” which gives to all great religions
their founder. At 29 he is fit to receive, and become instrument
of, a powerful Son of God, a Buddha of Compassion. In the
form of the man Jesus, this Being moves about, preaches, cures,
is rejected. The human body suffers the penalty for its services
rendered to its superhuman occupant. For more than 50 years,
in his astral body he visits his disciples, and instructs them in
esoteric lore. About 35 B.C. they sally forth to preach. Myth
crystallizes round the historic nucleus. Jesus is virgin born ;
crucified ; ascends.—In this way it is hoped that the historical
reality of Jesus will be saved from the confusions of the Gospels,
and his spiritual grandeur made only the more evident.1 But
many a Magdalen, we fear, will find her Lord to have been
“ taken away,” and in his place only the deplorable puppet of
Gnostic and Buddhist apocrypha.
CONCLUSION.—Briefly to sum up. Theosophy wit
nesses to some- of the profoundest instincts, and the
highest aspirations of God ward-bound humanity, and
stresses some of the most far-reaching truths revealed
in or governing it. The omnipresence of the divine ;
the lofty destiny of the soul; the essential brotherhood
of man; the character-forming potency of thought;
the constant perception of spiritual reality; the
resolute effort to penetrate below surface and the letter,
—all that is noble and should prove ennobling. Also
the determination to detect God’s spirit acting every
where; to hear the divine call in the stammered
words of the humblest of the prophets; to admire the
beauties even of the least fair of the world’s religions,—
that too seeks our sympathy. Yet we cannot but
observe—even as recorders of historically known
phenomena, constantly and ubiquitously recurrent—
that these high and precious forms are kept stretched
on the rack of an impossible philosophy, are muffled
beneath the most grotesque display of pseudo
erudition, are in danger of complete dissolution in
an air of treacherous sentimentalism. We are, of
course, open to the taunt of being Westerns: our
1 C/. G. R. S. Mesd, DidJesus Live 100 B.C. ?
�26
The History of Religions
[35
minds are gross: we lack the vital intuition : we
reject the supreme Authority of the Masters. Well,
to a Western consciousness there cannot but here
reveal itself an imposssible metaphysic; a psy
chology unverified ; a fairy-tale cosmology; an un
stable ethic, with its sanctions nullified, its categories
ill-defined. We see a law of Karma in manifold wise
self-contradictory, stultifying effort; a theology that
“depersonalizes” God without rendering Him the
more sublime; which drags Him down to matter
without making Him more lovable ; that exalts man
to the divine in despite of all his conscience tells him
of his low estate. We see the effort to retain, yet
rationalize, the notion of that Divine Union which
Christianity promises, asserting it a mystery. Finally,
we see a chaotic mass of “ evidence,” unsifted, un
evaluated, unorganized by a too slipshod thought and
an uneducated judgement, rendering history unin
telligible, and in it the figure of Jesus of Nazareth as
tragic as absurd. In the leaders of this movement
we see splendid energies, outstanding talents, warmth
of sympathy passionate in its tenderness as in its
indignations, and at times a genuine touch of
mystical thought and expression. Yet we must say
of them too what Reville says of those third-century
reformers with whom they are so glad to be linked :
“ Why must it be that at the very moment they seem
about to carry us to the sublimities of the ideal religion
—they fail us ? ” Like their “ Master, ” Orpheus, victus
animi, they look back, and the vision fades and the
voice stammers; perforce we turn—to whom else
should we go ?—to Him who has the words of
eternal life.
Appendix A.—There has never been an esoteric Christianity.
The simplest Christian has always had the right to Christ’s full
doctrine. “ I have spoken openly to the world : I always taught
in the synagogue where all the Jews come together, and in secret
I spoke nothing” (John xviii. 20, the interview with Nicodemus,
�35]
Theosophy
27
and John xvi. 12, 25, are not against this). Pagan mysteries
{cf. Leet. XI. 21-24; XIV. 11; XVI. 16-19; also art. “ Paganism”
in Cath. Encycl.} exacted an oath of secrecy from Initiates ; but
even they imparted, not special doctrines, but magical formula:
and an emotional impression that the adept was elect, blessed
for this life and the next. Pliny, c. 112 A.D., tortured Christians
to find out their religion. There were many apostates, but none
had secrets to reveal (Pliny, Ep., x. 97). Converts from
paganism reveal their secrets readily. Clement and Tertullian,
who relate them, ridicule and loathe them. Clement adopts the
phraseology of the mysteries (so even Paul, Rom. xi. 25, 1 Cor.
ii. 7, etc.), but puts the Christian’s initiation in heaven. Tertullian notes that Paul celebrates the Eucharist among pagans on
board ship 1 Justin relates the whole Christian cult and creed,
addressing “ the Emperor, his sons, the senate, the whole people.”
Irenaeus shows that had the Apostles preached a secret lore—as
heretics {e.g. the Gnostics), to defend their own practice, said they
had—the Bishops (depositaries of the “tradition”) would have
known it: but they wholly ignore it. When the Church developed
and conversions became frequent, profitable, or fashionable,
careful and gradual instruction was of course insisted on : the
catechumenate became more organized. In public preaching,
especially before mixed audiences, reverence suggested reti
cence : and this (curiously) becomes quite common from c. 350
onwards, a sentiment, almost an affectation {never a law), leading
preachers not to mention what everyone quite well knew, e.g.
(Chrysostom) the Lord’s Prayer; (Sozomen) the Nicene Creed!
Basil is (probably) the only Father who suggests that this
practice (with that which at this time is liturgically regular—
the exclusion of catechumens and unbelievers from the canon of
the Mass) was a tradition imposed by Christ or the Apostles.
Not till March 19, 416, does a papal letter of Innocent I. display
a pompous mystery in speaking of liturgical details which every
sacramentary was about to publish to anyone still ignorant of
them. The so-called disciplina arcani (a term invented in 1750
by the Protestant Daille), a secret code of doctrine and rite,
supposed to include the “ forms ” of consecration, the number of
the Sacraments, the dogma of the Trinity, etc., was really invented
for purposes of controversy by theologians who thought they
found gaps in the early traditions, and had no notion of any
“ development ” in the Church’s thought and language. Details,
it was argued, were kept secret—an esoteric lore, in fact. As
unscientific was the theory of early Protestants {e.g. Casaubon)
that the Pagan mysteries evolved the sacramental system in the
Church. In brief, genuine Christianity knows no opposition of
exoteric v. esoteric creed or cult; only the travesties of ancient
heresy or modern pseudo-history have imagined it. Cf. Mgr.
�28
The History of Religions
[35
Batiffol, “Arcane,” in Diet. Thiol. Cath , and Leclercq, ZV<V. Arch.
Chret.; Huyskens, Zur Frage uber sog. Arkandisziplin, 1891.
Appendix B.—Paganism, dying, tried to fuse its religions and
philosophies, to allegorize its myths, to find in one richly symbo
lized Pantheism consolation for its religious cravings, and salva
tion from the superstition or scepticism threatening it. Into
this current even the Jews were swept, where (as at Alexandria)
they were Hellenized. Philo (c. 40 A.D.) saw in Greek philosophy
(especially Stoicism) only a loan from Moses; while the O.T.,
especially the Pentateuch, he allegorized to find in it all the
treasures of Greek speculation. God, Philo held, was too trans
cendent to reveal Himself to intellect or sense, or even to create.
Intermediate Powers, accordingly, create our low world ; and
the “second god”—God “manifest”—the Logos or Reason or
“ Word,” expressed in the Universe, is our way of knowing God.
Yet asceticism can so free the soul from matter that it can soar
by ecstasy to contemplating the Divine Nature in itself {cf. Leet.
XII. 11 ; XVIII. 20, n. 3 ; XX. 8 sqqi). On its side Paganism
welcomed the mysterious Hebrew religion, thus reinterpreted
in its favour. The mystic cults of Orpheus, of Pythagoras (with
its Eastern theories of abstinence and transmigration), Persian
dualism and Egyptian Osiric or Greek Hermetic myth, the
highly Platonized Stoicism of the age, poured into the field
prepared by the Alexandrians. Hence emerged the “New
Platonism,” taking its stand no more upon reasoning or sense
experience, but on ancient Authority and immediate Intuition.
Plutarch, Cleanthes, Epictetus, even Apollonius, are among its
heralds ; the great Gnostics also. But its true founder was
Ammonius Sakkas, d. about 245 A.D. Origen, Longinus,
Plotinus will be his disciples ; Plotinus the most famous. In his
system, God the Invisible first generates Mind {nous); Mind,
the soul; the Soul, this world of phenomena (here is almost our
modern subjective idealism). Evil is not yet; only progressive
diminution of reality. But, once plunged in matter, the soul is in
conflict and disintegrates. Practice of virtues, asceticism, lift
the life to Mind; ecstasy, to God. Porphyry says that Plotinus,
in the six years he knew him, had four ecstasies. Porphyry was
rigidly virtuous and ascetic, and violently anti-Christian. The
Greek, especially Orphic statements of religion (Leet. XII. 3)
must,he insisted, be maintained. With Iamblichus (d. 330 A.D.)
the “ theologizing ” of Neoplatonism was complete. His de
Mysteriis reaches an incredible altitude of ascetic, altruistic, and
spiritual conception ; yet (tragic, but customary, paradox I) pre
cisely from this time Neoplatonism descends to the most
grotesque of magical charlatanism, and the most futile of
pseudo-mathematical fantasies. The fifth-century university
of Athens strove to purify, but merely rationalized, desiccated
�Theosophy
35]
29
it. Its best passed over to “Dionysius,” to Augustine, and
Boetius (cf. Aug., Conf., vii. 9-21). In Christian mysticism
alone has the psychic balance been maintained. In the nihilist
systems, where sense and intellect are held valueless, where
abstinence is the supreme method, equilibrium was swiftly lost;
licence and madness wait upon pagan asceticism and ecstasy.
Cf. especially Zeller, D. Philosophic d. Gnechen, 1881, iii.,
414-865.
.
Appendix C.—The Hebrew religion, though so exclusive,
modified surrounding cults (eg. of Sabazius, Leet. XIV. 13)
and was here and there modified by them (e.g. at Samaria: the
Essenes). Christianity, itself remaining pure, created, outside
itself, extraordinary new forms, especially in Judeo-pagan areas.
Even within the 'Church, the Judaizers provoked unhealthy
speculation as to the office and hierarchy of the angels, the
nature of God, His relation to the law, the Messiah. Speculation
runs riot: a special gnosis or esoteric knowledge claims to
sound the “ deep things ” (of Satan, cries the Apocalypse ii. 6,
14) ; tends to thrust God aloof; to subordinate the Christ; to
“genealogize”intermediatespiritualbeings ; topreach a perverse
asceticism (1, 2 Thess. ; 1 Cor. iii. 11-16; 1, 2 Tim. ; the
“circular letter” called Ephesians; especially Col. i. 15-10, ii.;
Jude ; 2 Peter. It is from Paul the Gnostics will take the words
pleroma, aon ; as from John, the Word, Life : not vice versa).
Contemporary with John, Cerinthus declares God so aloof that
He cannot “touch” matter. Thus on the man Jesus, born of
Joseph and Mary, the Christ, or Spirit, descends only at the
Baptism ; the creator-god, Yahweh, cannot be God, but is an
angel. Quiet follows for a space. But under Pope Callixtus
(217-222), a Syrian, Alcibiades, appears at Rome, with a mystic
book given, in 100 A.D., to a holy man named Elkasai by
an angel 30 leagues tall, called the Son of God, coupled with a
like female figure, the Spirit of God. They preach penance and
repeated baptisms, in which the initiates invoke seven witnesses,
Heaven, Earth, holy Spirits, Angels of Prayer, Oil, Salt, Earth.
Syrian formula1 occur, to be recited backwards. East of the
Jordan and Dead Sea, even about 400 A.D., sects of these (Osseans,
Sampseans, etc.) remained. They observe Jewish rites, retain
fragmentary gospels, reject Paul, practise asceticism, and usually
say that onto Jesus, son of Joseph, an ZEon, or Spirit, or Angel
(earlier incarnate in Adam, etc.) descended at the Baptism.
But genuine Gnosticism had truer forerunners in the Syrian
systems which may be connected with Simon Magus.1 His
4j, 1 See Acts viii.
14.
5, 14. Justin, Apol., i. 26, 56.
Irenaeus, a. Heer., i. 16.
Eus., H.E., ii. 13,
�30
The History of Religions
[35
system centred in Samaria, a tainted centre of Jewish reverie.
Simon taught a Supreme Power, which was himself, and its
First Conception, Wisdom (revealed in his companion Helen).
Through her, he conceives and thereby creates, the Angels.
They, jealous of her, prevent her return to his mind, whence she
had leapt. He therefore descends to redeem her (appearing, in
suitable form, in each of the Angelic Worlds as he passes through
it) into this angel-created world. In Samaria he appears (in
Simon) as Father, in Judea as the Son (in whom he seems to die),
in the Gentiles as the Spirit. He liberates the Divinity half
lost in humanity, and mankind (by the knowledge of himself)
he emancipates, eg. from the Mosaic Law. In this “ pre-Christian
Gnosticism” Phoenician, Hellenistic, and Judaic notions fused.
A mushroom growth of heresies followed. Saturninus of Antioch
(under Trajan, 98-119) is the first outstanding figure. For him
too God is infinitely remote. Seven angels make the world and
men, in some of whom is a spark, issued from God, and to return
to Him at death. Yahweh is such an angel, in revolt against
God. Jesus, an emanation from God, has no human birth or
body, but conies to defeat Yahweh and save such men as have
the spark. Marriage and procreation are works of Satan. Yet
Saturninus is no “Christ,” nor are “ couples ” (Simon-Helen)
indicated. In similar sects (which do not persist: Origen, c. 240,
says but thirty “Simonians” survive in the whole world!) we
always find an Ineffable God, coupled with a Supreme Thought;
hence Asons in groups of seven and eight emanate. Always too
some Ason suffers misfortune, whence sparks of fire fall into the
lower world. Often a Demiurge believes himself God, and inspires
the Old Testament. The Ason “Christ,” one of the highest in
the Pleroma (scl. the totality of the Asons), joins himself to the
man Jesus and they begin redemption. But under Hadrian
(117-138) the great Gnosticsappear, gravitating (inevitably) to
Rome, but hailing (Valentinus, Basilides, Carpocrates) from
Alexandria. Common features reveal themselves. The true
God is unreachable, incommunicable. Yahweh, Creator and
Lawgiver, is therefore no true God: but, like the world, is
but one in a series of divinely originated but degenerating
beings, often involved in some mysterious catastrophe. Jesus
comes to reveal God, and to deliver such elements in world or
man as are capable of redemption. But since God cannot
really unite with man, the Incarnation is illusory and transitory.
The Passion and Resurrection are unreal: our body will not
rise. Hence either the flesh, to free the soul, must be annihilated
(whence savage asceticism); or the soul, artificially linked to
flesh, is irresponsible for the body’s vagaries (whence licence).
Hence invariable rejection of Old Testament, and prolific*
creation of “esoteric” gospels—of Thomas, Philip, Jude; the
�35]
Theosophy
31
Greater and Lesser Questions of Mary ; the Gospel of Perfection :
hence “apocrypha” placed in the mouths of ancient sages—Enoch,
Seth, Elias ; hence new inspired prophets (Bar-kabbas, Barkoph): and mythical “ interpreters ” of the Apostles (“ Glaucias,
of Peter for the Basilidians : “Theodas,” of Paul for the Valentinians). Much external ceremonial and magic formula were
used.1 It is impossible to detail this grotesque system. Men
are material (who cannot be saved), psychic (who may be),
spiritual (who must be : these are the Valentinians—they simply
have to let themselves live; their spirit is independent of their
body). Basilides’ system was “celibate,” and nearer Saturmnus’
than Simon’s. The Unbegotten begot Mind, whence the Word,
whence Knowledge, whence Wisdom and Might, whence Virtues
Powers, and Angels. Our heaven (the 3^5^) 1S populated by
angels, chief of whom is Yahweh. He tries to tyrannize ; strife
breaks out; Gods sends Mind (as Jesus) to make peace. The
Cyrenean dies in his place, whence no honour is due to the
Crucified. The Old Testament is rejected, but ordinary
morality is retained. Passions are “appendices,” and cannot
hurt the soul in the long run, though forcing it to expiate sms
in future lives (by metempsychosis). Magic, especially the
word Abraxas, conquers bad angels. Carpocrates was far more
Hellenized and need not be detailed. He was a Platonist tinged
with Gnostic Christianity. In these systems the progressive
degeneration of Light into darkness, the irreducible opposition
of Good to Bad, shows as certain a modification of Syrian
thought by Persian dualism, as of Alexandrian by Platonic
Pantheism. Alexandria can thus be more tolerant than Syria,
and connect Christ with the Creator, with whom Syria can but
contrast Him. In the symbolism of the Gnostics the serpent
playeda prominent part. For all this cf. especially Mgr. Duchesne,
History of the Early Church, i. c. n ; Mansel, Gnostic Heresies,
1875 ; C. W. King, Gnostics and their Remains, 1887 ; Hort,
Judaistic Christianity, 1894.
Appendix D.—We permit ourselves to quote the following
letters of Mme. Blavatsky from the Proceedings of the Society
for Psychical Research, vol. iii. (parts viii., ix.), 1885, 201-400,
which contains two plates of H. P. B.’s handwriting and a plan of
the miraculous shrine. (H. P. B. boldly showed this report to
A. B. before her conversion.)
1 Valentinus’ system is “ nuptial” : the (male) Abyss marries Silence 5
hence Mind and Truth, who also marry (these are the first Tetrad of
Higher 4Eons) ; hence Word and Life, whence Man and Church,
whence many further pairs of intermarrying TEons, forming the
Pleroma.
�32
The History of Religions
[35
H. P. B. to Mme. Coulomb, Oct. 1883, (p. 211):—
Now, dear, let us change the programme. Whether something
succeeds or not, I mus't try. Jacob Sassoon, the happy proprietor of
a crore of rupees, is anxious to become a Theosophist. He is ready
to give 10,000 rupees to buy and repair the head-quarters; he said to
Colonel (Ezekiel, his cousin, arranged all this), if only he saw a little
phenomenon, got the assurance that the Mahatmas could hear what
was said, or give him some other sign of their existence (? ! 1). Well,
this letter will reach you the 26th, Friday; will you go up to the Shrine
and ask K. H. [Koot Hoomi ; the name of H. P. B.’s “ Master”] to
send me a telegram that would reach me about 4 or 5 in the afternoon
same day, worded thus :—
“ Your conversation with Mr. Jacob Sassoon reached Master just now.
Were the latter even to satisfy him, still the doubter would hardly
find the moral courage to connect himself with the Society.—Ramalinga
Deb.”
If this reaches me on the 26th, even in the evening, it will still
produce a tremendous impression. Address, care of N. Khandallavalla,
Judge, Poona. Jeferai le reste. Cela coutera quatre ou cinq roupies.
Cela ne fait rien.—Yours truly,
(Signed)
H. P. B.
Page 212 :—
Le general part pour affaires a Madras . . . et veut voir le shrine . . .
il est qu’il s’attend a un phenomene car il me l’a dit . . . suppliez K. H.
... de soutenir l’honneur de famille . . . Damn les autres. Celui-la
vaut son pesant d’or. Per l’amor del Dio ou de qui vous voudrez ne
manquez pas cette occasion car elle ne se repetera plus ... a vous de
cceur.—Luna Melancolica.
Page 214:—
Ma chere Arnie,—Je n’ai pas une minute pourrepondre. Jevous supplie
faites parvenir cette lettre (here inclosed) a Damodar in a miraculous
way. It is very, very important. Oh, ma chere que je suis done malheureuse 1 De tous cotes des desagrements et des horreurs. Toute a vous.
—H. P. B.
H. P. B. said these letters were forged by Mme. Coulomb,
whom she had expelled from the T.S. We respect English,
French, punctuation, etc.—Ed.
On the general question of mysticism, much material of singular
interest and an amazing bibliography will be found in Miss
Evelyn Underhill’s Mysticism., Methuen, 1911.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Theosophy
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Grandmaison, Leonce de (ed)
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 32 p. ; 19 cm.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references. Publication details from KVK (OCLC, WorldCat).
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Catholic Truth Society
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1912?]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA1555
Subject
The topic of the resource
Theosophy
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (Theosophy), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Theosophy
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/24f746bc3c01dae545243de1b9fbb12f.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=HUHejeRZGl0tYMoyPHd4OKZPoNscRfZZf5Oc8rUqUxoz%7EgxkH1O2fqXrbzEbMThj8Sg5Hv2i1jWk631qAdLmt5jB8%7EmdWkwW7kQZk2p%7EDo7wuSp4h%7E9YEIHbHlem9BTL0hrS-0-SOdMnLx0LpUaouzaKzTmOX%7EcPoHWhhgqhq-KtJZScxfJPpB5%7E654TxHEXzQWHeci96sNKA6%7ErZBEehYOr6URlqr0YLaTNiLxpsJa28r-8qD10zM8aN8A9Maxpxh7YhPzF9ei85n%7ErX1ZAkIvz9y1qPjTQ7A9ZSoLbcwjwVh8tOB9VnB7q1wMtzJngHdiA3Di13Ru3qnj1Yymm8Q__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
5a99e2d8351e3f6f175901d9c674ce14
PDF Text
Text
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
A. BONNER.
23, Streathbourne Road,
UPPER TOOTING, LONDON, 8AV.
3T 5 l'S
VA udì
Um \/ci (eJ >
MADAME BLAVATSKY.
(From a photograph by Messrs. Elliott & Fry, Baker-streeti W.)
��1
IV
M
It)
ia
IT
'2
1©
IT
IS
M
)H
ISIS«
VERY
MGOH
UNVEILED,
BEING
THE
STORY
OF
THE
GREAT
MAHATMA
HOAX'
ISndon :
raaVJ1 wHMEksTER. Gazette
Office,
Tudor Street, E.C.
auT
TOLD
FROM
SOURCES
MAINLY
THEOSOPHICAL]
BY
EDMUND
GARRETTO
author
OF
“IN
AFRIKANDER
LAND,”
“IBSEN’S. . "
BRAND
IN
ENGLISH
VERSE,”
All Right* Reserved.
�INDEX.
PART I.—The Story of the Great Mahatma Hoax.
Chapter I.— Introduction
„
II.—No Mahatmas, no Members ! ■....................................
„ III.—Mystification under Madame Blavatsky
„ IV.—The Psychical Research Exposure ..........................
,,
V.—Mystification under < Mrs. Besant.........................
» VI.—Enter the Mahatma
u VII.—Every Man his own Mahatma
,, VIII —The Adventures of a Seal
...................................
h IX.—The Climax of Theosophic .Brotherhood
„
X.—The Mahatma Tries Threats.....................................
„ XI.—Mrs. Besant’s coup de, main.....................................
» XII.—A Meeting of the (Theosophical) Pickwick Club ...
,, XIII.—Questions and Challenges..............
page.
•••
5
•••
13
17
22
27
32
36
42
48
55
60
67
...
•••
...
•••
...
PART II.—Answers and Theosophistries.
I.—From Officials
II.—From Prominent Theosophists
.............. ... ”
gg
III.—From Private Members ....................................
PART III.—A General Rejoinder.
Last Shreds of the Veil of Isis , .......................
POSTSCRIPT.
Mr. Judge’s Mahatma at Bay
>.............
L’Envoi : “The Society upon the Himalay”...
99
•»........................ 108
..............
Ix7
Illustrations and Facsimiles. .
Frontispiece. Portrait of Mme. Blavatsky.............
Portrait of Mrs. Besant.................................................
o s
„
Colonel Olcott................................... . '
The “ Mahatma’s Seal ”
...
...
...
Q. ”
The Envelope Trick...
...
...
...
... ”
®
Facsimiles of Mahatma Missives, of "Mr. judge’s" Handwriting^
. Portrait Cartoon
When Augur meets Augur3’ 3?.38' 5°’ 52’
�PREFACE.
Tourists at Pompeii are shown a temple of Isis. The impartial cinders
have preserved for us there, not only the temple, but the secret passage
which the priests used in the production of what are nowadays called
“ phenomena.”
The following pages are designed to show the secret passage in the
temple of the Theosophic Isis, the goddess of Madame Blavatsky’s “ Isis
Unveiled.”
Instead of having to wait on the pleasure of Vesuvius, I am enabled to
act as cicerone while the temple is still (for the present) a going concern.
The important difference between the exposure of Madame Blavatsky’s
box of tricks by the Society for Psychical Research, and the present
exposure of her successors is, that in this case we have the high-priesthood
giving evidence against itself. My own part in the business is merely the
humble one of seeing that they shall all satisfactorily “ get at ” one another.
In redacting, out of the mass of various testimony which has fallen into my
hands as clear and readable a story as I could present, my main care has
been to tone down the mutual insinuations. Talk about augur meeting
augur with a smile ! It is the snarl which these augurs cannot disguise.
As for myself, I have tried to render a service to truth; but I cannot
see, with some good people, that a sense of truth necessarily excludes a
sense of humour.
Mrs. Besant is a lady whose character I have often defended in the press,
though I have not always been able to accept the extremer estimates of
her intellectual power. She is about the only one of my dramatis persona
in whom the public at large (like myself) feel any personal interest
whatever. She is, therefore, the strongest buttress of a fabric which she
has now for some time known to be rotten at the base. That is why I
have dealt more seriously with her than with these Olcotts and Judges.
The President is too flabby to be worth fighting; the Vice-President is
�ii.
PREFACE.
already thrown over by all the shrewder and honester members ; even
Mrs, Besant herself has now cabled her refusal to accept his latest
revelation, and discovered that his Mahatma is indeed a fraud—when he
“ deposes ” Mrs. Besant.
My pity is saved for those humbler dupes of the rank-and-file who have
trusted these others not wisely but too well. From some of them I have
seen pathetic letters ; and if any gall has got upon my pen, it is the gall
of the bitterness of their disillusion. They are more widely spread, and
more worth saving from the quagmire of shams than most people suspect.
I need hardly remark that I was never a Theosophist myself. But my
Theosophical sources of information, referred to in the course of the
story, have been growing within the Society week by week ever since the
exposure began.
There are no signs at present of any intention on the part of the three
Theosophic chiefs to return from the various continents to which they
departed last July—departed simultaneously with the issue of that Report
of an Inquiry ”, (so-called) which is the starting-point of these chapters.
Mrs. Besant has left Australia to join Colonel Olcott in India ; Mr. Judge
remains just five days hence at New York. And so, taking a cue from
Mahomet and the Mountain, “ Isis Very much Unveiled ” will now, in
booklet form, go out to them.
F. Edmund Garrett.
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
PART
I.
THE STORY OF THE GREAT MAHATMA HOAX«
CHAPTER I.—INTRODUCTORY.
■“ O my Theosophists . . . What a pack of fools you are!”—Madame Blavatsky.
This will be one of the queerest stories ever unfolded in a news
paper. Truth, as worshipped by the Theosophists, is indeed stranger
than fiction. But it is not here told merely for entertainment. It has
also a degree of importance and instructiveness measured by the
growing wealth and numbers of the Theosophical Society, and
the personal influence of Mrs. Besant. To-day the Theosophical
Society numbers some three or four thousand members in
Europe, India, and America. It supports two or three publish
ing businesses and several score of magazines in various languages.
It boasts offices and house property in London, New York, and
Adyar. . It attracts donations and bequests. It numbers a title or two
and some money-bags. It consists almost entirely of educated or semi
educated people, many of whom are intelligent, many sincere; a few both.
And it is likely, amid that debauch of sign-seeking and marvel-mongering
into which a century rationalistic in its youth has plunged in its dotage,
to captivate an increasing number of those who are bored with the old
religions and yet agog for a new.
It is especially to these that I dedicate the singular narrative which
these articles are to un old. It may save them betimes a painful disillu
sionment, such as it will, I fear, inflict on many who are as yet
numbered among the faithful.
What is the situation at present ?
�6
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
Everybody knows that Madame Blavatsky, the original founder of
the society, supported its pretensions to an occult origin by the pro
duction of phenomena which were pronounced by careful investigators
to be due to systematic trickery ; but which are still believed by the
faithful to have been produced at Madame’s request, and in support of
the Theosophic movement, by certain _ Eastern sages possessed of
transcendental powers over mind and matter.
Everybody will remember that Mrs. Besant, on whom the mantle
of Madame Blavatsky has fallen, made a sensational public assertion,
some time after her teacher’s death, to the effect that those “ powers
were still at work (they were indeed! ), and that she was herself now
the recipient of similar “communications” irom the “ Mahatmas.”
A few people are aware that as the result of a sort of split among
prominent members of the society, there was recently a Theosophic
meeting at which Mrs. Besant confessed to her friends that there had
been something wrong with the “communications” which she had
been in such a hurry to announce to the public; made certain
Theosophically obscure charges against a brother official of the society }
but persuaded those assembled to rest content with a general statement
and not to inquire into the facts further—in short, generally to hush
the matter up.
This the Theosophists, being a docile folk, conscientiously did J
and as the accused proceeded with Mrs. Besant’s sanction to deny, still
in general terms, what little assertion of fact Mrs. Besant herself had
appeared to convey, after which there was an affecting reconciliation :
it is not surprising that to the outside public the mystery remains
exactly where it was.
Even of the Theosophists themselves the full facts are only known
at present to a few of the inner ring.
In view of what has gone before, this reticence appears misplaced ;
and as circumstances have put me in possession of the facts, I propose
to give them the same publicity as was enjoyed by Mrs. Besant’s
original statement.
I propose to show :—
That Mrs. Besant has been bamboozled for years by bogus “com
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
7
munications ” of the most childish kind, and in so ludicrous a ¡ashion
as to deprive of all value any future evidence of hers on any question
calling for the smallest exercise of observation and common sense.
That she would in all probability be firmly believing in the bogus
documents in question to this day, but for the growing and at last
irresistible protests of some less greedily gullible Theosophists.
That the bamboozling in question has been practised widely and
systematically, ever since Madame Blavatsky’s death, pretty much as it
used to be during her lifetime.
That official acts of the society, as well as those of individual
members, have been guided by these bogus messages from Mahatmas.
That the exposure of them leaves the society absolutely destitute
of any objective communication with the Mahatmas who are alleged
to have founded and to watch over it, and of all other evidence of their
existence.
That Mrs. Besant has taken a leading part in hushing up the facts
of this exposure, and so securing the person whom she believes to have
written the bogus documents in his tenure of the highest office but one
in the society.
And that therefore Mrs. Besant herself and all her colleagues are in
so far in the position of condoning the hoax, and are benefiting
in one sense or another by the popular delusion which they have
helped to propagate.
I shall show, finally, that the only alternative to this set of con
clusions is another which would be even more discreditable to the
personnel of the society, and even more fatal to its continued existence
on its present bas’S.
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
CHAPTER
NO
MAHATMAS,
NO
II.
MEMBERS!
“ If there are no Mahatmas the Theosophical Society is an absurdity,
and there is no use in keeping it up.”—Mrs. Besant, in Lucifer, Decem
ber 15, i8go.
Before going any further I wish to emphasise one point. This
society, as such, must stand or fall with its “ Mahatmas.” It should
be realised how consistent, in one sense, this miracle-mongering side
of the Theosophical movement has been throughout the society’s
history ; what an important part it has played and continues to play
in attracting popular interest; and how closely, along one of the
versatile thaumaturgist’s many lines, Madame Blavatsky has been
followed by her present-day imitator. I say this in justice to the
latter, who, I think, may fairly complain of the unkind criticisms
passed on his Mahatma-missives by colleagues who still cherish
those produced under the auspices of Madame Blavatsky.
It is true that the society does not officially vouch for Mahat
mas. It is careful not to demand belief in them as a condition of
membership; and the shrewder members are put into a panic by
anything which tends to compromise its boasted “ neutrality ” on
this tender subject. But we shall soon see what this “ neutrality ”
is worth.
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
9
:
Madame Blavatsky taught that “ the Masters ” are certain sages,
several hundred years old or so, who by steeping themselves in the
immemorial lore of the East have attained powers transcending time,
space, and the other puny limits of Western science. By profound
solitary meditation on Things in General, these old gentlemen have
arrived at a sort of Fourth Dimension, in which a Soul and a Saucer
come to very much the same thing.
Their residence was shrouded
in a judicious mystery, which Madame declared herself under a solemn
oath to preserve. She at first located them in the recesses of the
Himalayas j but one of her most zealous disciples lately stated in the
Daily Chronicle that “ the two principal Mahatmas now reside in an oasis
of the Desert of Gobi.” At any rate, these “adepts” prefer a seques
tered spot, and remain occult in the strictest sense of the word.
But on some points Madame was unequivocal about them. She
declared that she had sat at the feet of one of them as his
chela (pupil); that the Theosophical Society was founded under
his distinct inspiration; and that he and his brothers continued
to intervene in its affairs. The original draft of the Society’s constitu'ion, in fact, like a more authentic Veda straight from heaven, had
been “precipitated” in New York by an exertion of the Masters’
psychic force from Tibet. Hesitating converts and dubious subscribers
were determined by the same form of interposition ; and somebody or
other has taken steps, at all times of the society’s history, to ensure
that the more faithful of the “ chelas" should be comforted and
encouraged as need arose, by missives from their invisible
“guru.” (A good, imposing word, “guru.” Do you remember the
terrible old man by the road in “David Copperfield,” who scared
David almost out of his wits by running out on him, and shouting
“Guroo, guroo, guroo”?) Mrs. Besant herself has admitted that
Theosophy is to be regarded in the light of a “ revelation ” from
these exalted beings, as well as in that of a science or philosophy
which can be arrived at by more ordinary means.
In a word, Theosophy without Mahatmas would be “Hamlet”
without the Prince of Denmark. “ Isis Unveiled ” and “ The Secret
Doctrine” are works which few would be found to wade through
�IO
ISIS VERY MUCH UN VEILED.
if their verbose pages were not lightened by associations of that White
Magic which lends a creepy interest even to such avowed works of fiction
as “ Zanoni ” and “ Mr. Isaacs.” With belief in the Mahatmas must
go any believing of “H.P.B.,” who swore to them; and.„with
“ H.P.B.” and her authorities must go those two volumes of solemn
farrago, which remain the society’s only contribution to philosophical
knowledge. For all that is new in them, if there is anything new
except the blunders, is explicitly given on the authority of “ the
Masters.”
The published “ Objects ” of the society run thus :—
(1) To form the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood of Humanity
without distinction of race, creed, sex, caste, or colour.
(2) To promote the study of Aryan and other Eastern literatures,
religions, and sciences.
(3) A third object—pursued by a portion only of the members of the
Society—is to investigate unexplained laws of nature and the psychical
powers of man.
It will thus be seen that the “ phenomenal ” side of the society’s
activities has all along had a place, though guardedly, even in its pub
lished Objects. In point of fact, as I have elsewhere insisted, this third
Object is the only one in pursuit of which the society has any sub
stantial achievement to point to. As to the first Object, my narrative
will presently suggest the same sort of remark on the brotherliness of
the Universal Brothers as has sometimes been made by scoffers on
the sociability of Socialists. As to the second Object, it is
observed that there are people who study Oiiental literatures,
and there are people who belong to the Theosophical Society;
but they are not the same people. Professor Max Müller has edited
the only series of English translations of the Sacred Books of the East
with which I am acquainted, and Professor Max Müller lately published
some University lectures under the title of Theosophy. But his preface
explained that he did so in order to rescue that respectable and ancient
philosophical term from the associations of sciolism and miracle
mongering with which the Theosophical Society have linked it in the
public mind. In point of fact, there is no reason to believe
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
il
that any member of the society in Europe could pass an examination
in any ' Oriental language whatever. The third Object, on the o er
hand, has led to some real achievements.
The society has not,
perhaps, done much in the “ investigation ” line itself; but members
of it have certainly supplied the most astonishing “unexplained
laws of nature” and “psychical ‘ powers ” for investigation y
other people. It is this which has given it its success, its growt ,
its world-wide notoriety.
It is this which first attracted an COI\
vinced its best-known converts, and it is this which has created
the successive “ booms ” (as they would be called in a more pure y
commercial connexion) which have produced the biggest crops o
entrance subscriptions from the wonder-loving public. I ay stress
on this because the Theosophists have shown a good deal of incon
stancy in their treatment of the third Object. They have always worked a
given marvel for all it was worth until it got somehow blown upon ; then
they turn round and remark that mere material phenomena are, alter
all, of no great importance : the thing is the study of. t os®
great spiritual ideas which, &c., &c. In fact, they want to have.it ot
’ways.
Mr. Sinnett, however, whose “Occult World” remains the
classic description of Madame Blavatsky as a wonder-worker, con esses
candidly in a memorial sketch of her which appeared in the Review
of Reviews how much stress she herself laid on such things, as ong as
she could get anyone to believe in them:—
One could no more write a memoir on trigonometry and say nothlӣ
about triangles, than survey the strange career just concluded and ignore tne
marvels coruscating through it. And at this early period of er en erp
The means, before the Psychical Research exposure] she seems to have
depended more on the startling effect of surprising powers she was enableU
to exhibit than on the philosophical teaching .... which became tne
burden of her later utterances.
Just so. It is easy to hold your miracles cheap—after they have
been found out. Madame Blavatsky fell back on Object Two when
Object Three was discredited. But the taste for such things, even when
it is de rigueurto describe them as “ occult applications of strictly natural
laws,” is apt to grow upon any religious sect which once dabbles in
them. ’ Mrs. Besant, too, in due course fell a victim to the temptation
�Ï2
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
to make capital out of the marvellous ; and my readers will now
be prepared to put their proper value on the deprecating expressions
in this connexion which now, on the inevitable turn of the wheel, once
more .begin to be heard, and which will be redoubled, no doubt, when
this narrative is fully before the public.
�ISIS .VERY MUCH .UNVEILED.
CHAPTER III.
MYSTIFICATION
UNDER
MADAME
BLAVATSKY.
“ Now, dear, let us change the programme . . . He is willing to'
’ give 10,000 rupees . . . if only he saw a little ‘ phenomenon ’ ! ” —
Blavatsky-Coulomb Letters.
It is no part of my present object to enter at length into the
history and character of the late Madame Blavatsky.
But a com
parison of the earlier phase of the Theosophical Society with that of
to-day is so indispensable to the right appreciation of both, that a
brief resume (borrowed mainly from previous sketches of my own
elsewhere) may be welcome at this point, even to readers already
familiar with the subject.
The Theosophical Society was born in America of Russo-Yankee
parentage. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky founded it at New York in
1874, with the aid first of Colonel Olcott, then a kind of journalist,
who became, and still is, the president, and soon afterwards of William
Q. Judge, then a lawyer’s clerk in Olcott’s brother’s office, who became,
arid still is, the vice-president.
The previous career of the Foundress had been remarkable
enough, if we accept hostile accounts of it—still more remarkable
if we accept her own ; but with this I am not concerned. From 1874
Madame Blavatsky’s history and that of the Theosophical Society
are one.
In 1878 the society moved its headquarters to India, and in
the congenial atmosphere of the mysterious East launched into marvels.
Eked out by performances not unlike a drawing-room Maskelyne and
�H
ISIS VERY MUCH UN VEILED.
Cook, Madame’s rehash of Neo-platonist and Kabbalistic mysticism
with Buddhist terminology soon “caught on” with the impressionable
natives. It had especial attraction for the educated and ardent young
Babu, that typical product of British India whom Mr. Rudyaid
Kipling has so often drawn for us. But it also carried away, thanks
to Madame’s intense personality—half repulsion, half charm—editors and officials of mark in the sceptical circles of AngloIndia.
It made Mr. A. P. Sinnett (then editor of the Pioneer)
turn evangelist in “ The Occult World,” and Mr. A. O. Hume (then
Government Secretary) follow suit with “ Hints on Esoteric Philosophy.”
And no wonder. Never was a new religion more industriously supplied
with miracles—those coups de main celestes, as a witty Frenchman has
defined them. Wherever Madame happened to be with a select circle
of friends, disciples, or laymen worth impressing, but especially
in and about the bungalow at Adyar, near Madras, the society’s head
quarters, the invisible Mahatmas were never tired of exhibiting their
astonishing psychic powers over ponderable matter. The two who
were especially at Madame’s disposal went by the names (reverently
breathed)of Mahatma Morya and MahatmaKootHoomi Lal Sing. In the
region of White Magic they could do almost anything—any feat which an
adroitly led-up conversation might happen to suggest. But the particular
lines of business (if I may be allowed the phrase) of which they made
a speciality were making objects appear and disappear : in Madame’s
jargon, integrating and disintegrat ng them by a psychical command
over astral vortices of atoms. Sitting in their studies 2,000 miles away
in Tibet, they could, by a mere effort of will, project an astral epistle, or
an astral body, oran astral cup and saucer, into the middle of an applauding
circle at afternoon tea or picnic in Madras or Bombay. Showers of roses
fluttered down from the ceiling. Invisible bells ’ tinkled from none
knew where. All kinds of tricks were played with Madame’s inter
minable cigarettes. Sketches and treatises were psychically “precipi
tated ” on to blank paper, nay, sometimes the very stationery was
created out of nothing to receive them. Such inferior sketches,
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
*5.
too, and such twaddling, such very twaddling, treatises ! One
disciple—Damodar K. Mavalankar, a youth passionately ambitious of
fame—even advanced to the acquirement of some of these extraordinary
powers in his own person. Merely to have seen the astral body of a
Mahatma became in a manner a cheap accomplishment. Damodar
boasted that he had once or twice projected his own—slipping spooklike through a brick wall.
_
'
Most of these marvels, as I have hinted, required the mise en scène
of the Adyar bungalow. Here Madame and the Colonel, and a few
favoured chelas, had apartments. “ Our domestic imbeciles ” and “ our
familiar muffs ” the latter are termed in one of the letters attributed to
Madame. Here, too, in the “ Occult Room ” adjoining Madame’s
bed-chamber, hung the famous “ Shrine,” a sort of cupboard containinga fancy portrait in oils of the condescending Koot. This became'
associated with as many marvels as the image of a mediaeval saint.
Suppose you are an intending Theosophist—a hesitating convert,
especially a moneyed one, like Mr. Jacob Sassoon.
You call at’
headquarters. You are shown round by Damodar, or by M. or MadameCoulomb, librarian and secretary.
With natural curiosity youask to gaze upon the Master’s features. You are told of hisindulgent concessions to deserving neophytes seeking for a sign. When'
the cupboard has been shut again, you are asked if there is anything'
you particularly desire from the Master. You indicate, not unna
turally, a message. It is about even chances wnether the said message
—reading generally not unlike Mr. Martin Tupper in his more
Oracular vein—is discovered in the cupboard immediately on reopening
the door, or descends from the cei.ing on to the top of your head.
The fame of these things, set out in the driest possible detail in the
pages of “ The Occult World,” aroused a furore of curiosity in this
country, where people were just beginning to take a new interest in
questions of psychical research. It was about the time when family
circles played the “ willing game,” and sat in the dark trying to see
purple flames coming out of a magnet. Quick to seize the psycho
logical'• moment, Madame Blavatsky came to England and
“ starred ” London in the season of 1884.
In her train came
�16
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
Colonel Olcott and Mohini L. Chatterji.
Mohini, a Brahmin,
graduate of the University of Calcutta, shone like Damodar with a,
lustre not all reflected. He, it was whispered, was a chela of some
attainments. He was not to be touched. He held his hands politely
behind him when being introduced. There was a splendour as of
some astral oil about his dusky countenance and thick black locks;
while his big, dark eyes were as piercing as those of Madame herself.
Men gazed on Mohini with awe, and ladies with enthusiasm. In the
background hovered the recording Sinnett.
In spite of the disappointing fact that the London air proved
unfavourable to miracles, the tale of the Indian ones was greedily drunk
in, and Theosophy became the fashionable fad. Society people took to
calling themselves Esoteric Buddhists : some were enrolled as chelas at
short notice. The Theosophists went the round of the London drawing-,
rooms, penetrated to provincial towns, were not unheard of at the Univer
sities. Madame rolled cigarettes and swore and talked black magic in the
rooms of well-known Cambridge dons, till the hair of undergraduate
listeners stood on end.
Those were the days when a set of
enthusiastic pass-men lived “ the higher life ” on a course of Turkish
baths and a date diet; while three unlucky youths at Trinity nearly
poisoned themselves with hasheesh in an attempt to project their astral
bodies, and were only recovered at midnight by a relentless tutor armed,
with the college authority and a stomach-pump.
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
17
f>
CHAPTER
i
IV.
THE PSYCHICAL RESEARCH EXPOSURE.
' .
.
...
. 'i
“ Either she is a messenger from the’Mahatmas or else she is a fraud.
In either case the Theosophical Society would have had no existence
without her.”—Mrs. Besant in Lucifer., December 15, 1890.
At the time of the Blavatsky season in London and Cambridge,
the lately-founded Psychical Research Society, which had close con
nexion with the University town, was spoiling for something to investi
gate, and it decided to investigate Madame Blavatsky. Madame and
her friends were delighted with this testimony to the stir which they
had made, and entered into • the thing with every hope of converting
the Researchers. Were they not all ready to asseverate that such-andsuch things had indeed happened------ in India ? .
Whatever Theosophists may now say, the ‘S.P.R.’ was certainly not
a hostile tribunal. Its very existence and objects were a challenge to
tile average educated prejudice which assumes that nothing can ever
happen in nature which is not accounted for in current scientific text
books. The society had itself vouched for “telepathy,” and coquetted
with “phantasms of the living ” ; it has since bestowed a statistical
respectability on the common ghost. To the miracles of Adyar some
of its members had lent a more than friendly ear. One of the most
prominent had actually been dubbed a chela. Dr. Hodgson (now
. secretary of the S.P.R. American Branch), who conducted the Indian
' part of the inquiry, declared that whatever prepossessions he may have
�i8
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
had “ were distinctly in favour of occultism and Madame Blavatsky.”
When Mr. Hodgson got to India he found people very much excited
over some highly suspicious and suggestive letters which had5just
appeared in a Madras paper, communicated by the Madame Coulomb
already spoken of, and alleged by her to have been written by Madame
Blavatsky. Mr. Hodgson had to inquire on the spot: first, into the
genuineness of these letters; secondly, into that of the missives
alleged to have been precipitated by Mahatmas; thirdly, into the credi
bility of the evidence about other marvels given before the Psychical
Committee by Madame herself, Colonel Olcott, Mr. Sinnett, andMohini.
He inquired and investigated for three months; and his report, with
copious facsimiles and plans, is on record in Part IX. of the S.P.R.
Proceedings (December, 1885).
The allegation of the Coulombs was that the whole series of miracles
had been a matter of vulgar trickery, some of which they had
been employed to carry out for Madame. During Madame’s absence in
Europe, the people at Adyar had quarrelled with them and dismissed the
pair, partlyfor having at various times hinted to outsiders the secrets which
they now proceeded to make a clean breast of. The origin of their close
relationship with Madame Blavatsky is obscure. She and Madame
Coulomb had been associated at Cairo in the seventies in some “ page ”
which the foundress of Theosophy had expressed a wish to have “torn
out of the book of my life.” By the foundress’s own account, this
torn-out page was such as made it odd that she should pitch on the
Coulombs when in want of fit guardians for the sacred Shrine. Mrs.
Besant once expounded to me a theory that Madame did this, with the
full foreknowledge that frauds would follow and would discredit her and
her Masters, partly from a sublime benevolence towards the wicked
Coulombs, partly because it was necessary that she should her
self “ have her Calvary.”
It was the same combined motives,
no doubt, which led Madame Blavatsky to act more than once exactly
as if Madame Coulomb had some secret hold over her. An agitated
telegram from Paris, however, failed to heal the present rupture ; and
the result was the giving to the press of a long series of letters in
Madame’s hand, teeming with veiled instructions to the Coulombs
which fitted in at every point with their accounts of jugglery at Adyar
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
J9
The Coulomb story tallied also with equal accuracy with
such outside circumstantial evidence as happened to touch it.
Did Madame Coulomb allege that a “ miracle ” was worked by the
substitution of one vase for another exactly similar, the shop sne named
proved to have record of the purcnase of just such an exact pair just
before the date of the miracle. Did she make a similar statement about a
“ miraculous ” shower of roses, the like corroboration would be forthcoming. . Did her husband describe the famous “Shrine” cupboard
as a trick-cabinet with three sliding panels in the back, the panels had to
be admitted, and explained by Madame as “for convenience of packing
in case of removal.” It had hung against a hidden recess in the wall—
there was the recess, the coincidence had to be deplored as unfortunate.
On the other side of that recess, in Madame’s bedroom, the sideboard
had a false back—that, too, was to be seen, and the Theosophists must
content themselves with alleging that M. Coulomb had made it so after
the miracles, and in the nick of time for the inquiry. As for the scribbled
instructions and letters in which some of these arrangements were clearly
hinted at, Madame was driven to the peculiar course of admitting some
letters and even parts of letters and denying the rest. This, by the way,
was exactly what she had done about a similar incriminating letter on
the subject of a trick “ missive,” which was planted on Mr. C. C. Massey,
in 1882 ; the discovery of which led to the resignation of that gentleman
and others from the Society.
As for the evidence of Madame and her friends about special
“ phenomena ” it had already so melted away under the application of
ordinary evidential canons as to leave the field clear for the Coulomb
theory. The “ tests ” with which in some cases the Mahatmas had
ins sted on supplementing the credibility of their witnesses were as
worthless and disingenuous as all the rest.
Last, what of the Mahatma missives ?—precipitated from
the Himalayas, speaking^ in the persons and signed with the
superscriptions of Mahatma Morya and Koot Hoomi Lal Sing.
These precious documents, which had been rained among
the laith ul with a copiousness almost amounting to garrulity, had
been a little discredited already. The prosy and sometimes illiterate
verbiage cf the Tibetan sages was a severe trial to the enthus asm of
�20
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
the more critical Theosophists even where it was apparently original.
But it was too much of a good thing when a long doctrinal
treatise, which Koot Hoomi had addressed to Mr. Sinnett, was
found to be a gross plagiarism from a lecture by an American
gentleman which had been reported in a Spiritualist paper a few months
before. Nor did it mend matters when, after considerable delay, the
illustrious Koot condescended to the newspaper arena, and wrote—we
mean precipitated—an explanation which for its evasiveness and
general “ thinness ” is probably unique even in the records of convicted
plagiarists.
But now came worse. For the same scrutiny which had identified
Madame Blavatsky as the writer of the unblushing letters to Madame
Coulomb now found exactly the same characteristics of expression, turns
of phrase, and solecisms in spelling in the compositions of Koot Hoomi
Lal Sing. As to handwriting, it was shown that the styles of the two
august correspondents had been evolved gradually by differentiation
lrom Madame’s ordinary hand. The facsimiles in the report deal only
with “ K.H.” documents ; but the case against those of “ M.” is just as
strong. I showed a mass of “M.” script, which lies before me as I write,
belonging to the earliest period, to a Theosophist well acquainted with
Madame’s writing, and in perfect innocence he at once took it for hers.
At that time almost the only difference between the two Mahatma
scripts was that one affected red pencil or ink, and the other blue.
FACSIMILE OF MAHATMA M.’S SIGNATURE.
FROM AN EARLY
BLAVATSKY MISSIVE.
In a word, it was declared that Koot Hoomi Lal Sing and Mahatma
Morya were the same person, and that person Madame Blavatsky. When
a missive from the Himalayas floated down into the neophyte’s lap, it
was Madanfe’s own hand which had prepared it, though it was the
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
21
no less useful if humbler function of MT Coulomb to jerk it-from
the ceiling at the critical moment with a string, or deftly pass it through
the sliding panel into the closed Shrine.
Passing by the committee’s report on Madame Blavatsky herself,
what of her leading disciples ? Of Colonel Olcott it was declared proven
that in aTheosophical connexion hewas eitherunable to describe anything
as he really saw it, or else to see anything as it really was. Mohini
and Mr. Sinnett were disposed of in much the same way. Damodar—the
astral Damodar—was charged explicitly as a confederate of Madame in
Missive-manufacturing. Mohini, the fascinating saint, hurried back to
India with a damaged halo. Mr. Sinnett has since sprung to fame as a
director—not of the regeneration of mankind, but of the Hansard
Union. Damodar announced that he was off to find his guru in the
Himalayas, disappeared, and has not been seen since by his friends.
William Q. Judge, having been left out in the cold when the hegira
to India took place, lived to fight another day, as we shall see. Mrs.
Besant had not yet loomed on the Theosophical horizon. Madame
Blavatsky herself left England and travelled till the storm had blown over.
To the S.P.R. Report no serious answer has ever appeared from
that day to this ; and it fairly killed the miraculous phenomena. One
class of them has reappeared under the aegis of Mrs. Besant; but poor
indeed, as we shall see, is the Late Besantine period of mythological
architecture beside its gorgeous predecessor.
�22
ISIS VERY MUCH LN VEILED.
CHAPTER
V.
MYSTIFICATION UNDER MRS. BESANT.
“ I look to possible developments of her Theosophic views with the
very gravest misgiving.”—Charles Brad laugh, National Reformer,
June, i88g.
“ The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”—Hamlet.
I have said that the Psychical Research report put a stop to most
of the Theosophic miracles. But there were obvious reasons why the
Mahatmas should continue to “ precipitate ” letters, even when the
scoffs of a hard, cold world drove them to restrain their wonder-working
propensities in other respects. The business was so beautifully safe and
simple. It defied “ tests.” The task of proving that a scribble in red
chalk on a scrap of paper found in a disciple’s pocket is not the
authentic handwriting of an inaccessible teacher, whose devotees have
doubtless the best reason for knowing that he can never be pro
duced as a witness—this is a task from which the boldest sceptic might
well recoil.
But what of the actual process of “precipitation”? Alas, it
appears to be surrounded by disappointingly obscure conditions. It
is not given to seethe scrap of psychically-manufactured notepaper glimmer
into being and become cream-laid out of nothing before one’s eyes, nor
to watch the mystic characters form themselves in lines along it like' the
writing on Belshazzar’s wall. It is always the finished result that is
discovered ready-made, and this precisely resembles what is produced if
you or I write it in the ordinary way. The “precipitation,” in fact,
is a deed of darkness, and can only be done concealed from view,
just as mediums are wont to declare at a séance that the spirits
are prevented from manifesting themselves by the mere presence
of a sceptical inquirer with a box of wax vestas. Perhaps
�ISIS VERY MUCH LEVRILED.
23
it is another side of the same retiring instinct which impels the
Mahatmas to live only in parts of the earth not penetrated to by
vulgar explorers. Theosophists sometimes speak as if they had seen
the actual precipitation; but cross-examine any credible witness, and
he will reluctantly admit that he has not. This is a point to note and
bear in mind.
The Mahatma missive only becomes a matter of difficulty when it*
has to be made to drop from the ceiling into the recipient’s hands, or
spirited into a cupboard found one moment before to be as empty as
Mother Hubbard’s. Those were stirring days for Theosophic neophytes
when that kind of thing was a common incident. But, ichabod 1 that
glory is departed 1 Its departure precisely synchronised with that of the
nimble-fingered Coulombs. Their graceless avowal that both special
plant and skilful confederates were required for this kind of miracle
may have been a gross calumny on their employer; but the fact
remains that with the removal of the panel-backed Shrine at Adyar andthe dismissal of its custodians, the Masters abruptly ceased to resort to
these more surprising methods of aerial post.
Occasionally they would make the assurance of the faithful doubly
sure by artlessly “ precipitating ” the message inside a sealed envelope(a species of “ test” of which more anon) ; but for the most part they
were content to endorse letters passing through the ordinary post or
discovered by the recipient in his blotting-pad under circumstances equally
consistent with a commonplace human agency.
Such was the state of things till Madame Blavatsky’s death.
But then came the rub. What the Psychical Research Committee
held to be proven was that Madame had written practically the whole
body of these documents with her own hand. What, then, if after her
decease in May, 1891, the same missives continued to be received?
Before the controversy which sprang up again over her ashes had
well died down, the public was asked to believe that this was indeed
the case, on the word of a woman whom it believed incapable of making
a statement of the kind without having first proved it to the uttermost
and found it true.
�24
ISIS VERY MUCH LNVPILED.
' Speaking in the Hall of Science on August 30, 1891, three months
after Madame Blavatsky’s death, Mrs. Besant said :—
“ You have known me in this hall for sixteen and a half years.,
“You have never known me tell a lie. (‘No, never,’ and loud
cheers.) 1 tell you that since Madame Blavatsky left I have
« had letters in the same handwriting as the letters which she
“ received. (Sensation.) Unless you think dead persons can
“ write, surely that is a remarkable fact. You are surprised; I do
“ not ask you to believe me; but I tell you it is so. All the
“ evidence I had of the existence of Madame Blavatsky’s
<c teachers of the so-called abnormal powers came through
Unless even sense can at the
“ her.
It is not so now.
“ same time deceive me, unless a person can at the same
“ time be sane and insane, I have exactly the same certainty for the
“ truth of the statements I have made as I know that you are here.
“ I refuse td be false to the knowledge of my intellect and the percep“ tions of my reasoning faculties.”
It is no wonder that the reporter had to interpolate the word
“ Sensation.” The audience was one rather of Freethinkers than of
Theosophists; the hall itself was identified with previous rhetorical
successes of Mrs. Besant as the prophetess of Materialism. The thing
was dramatically done, and was well calculated to impress on the
outside public the fact that the personal reputation of Mrs. Besant
lor intelligence and honesty was now pledged to the genuineness of
Theosophical wonder-working. In an interview in the Pall Mall Gazette
of September 1, 1891, Mrs. Besant carried her statement still further,
and pledged herself definitely to “ precipitation ” :—
“ ‘ These letters are from a Mahatma whose pupil you are ? ’
“ Mrs. Besant nodded assent.
“ ‘ Did they just come through the post ? ’ our representative
“ asked.
“ But here he had hit the mystery.
“ ‘ No, I did not receive the letters through the post,’ the lady
“ replied. ‘ They did come in what some would call a miraculous
“ fashion, though to us Theosophists it is perfectly natural. The letters
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
25
** I receive from the Mahatmas are “ precipitated.” ’
“ ‘ How “ precipitated ”? ’ ...
1
“ Mrs. Besant was quite ready to explain.
“ ‘Well,’ she said, ‘ you can hear voices by means of the telephone,
“ and receive a telegram which is actually written by the needle,
not merely indicated by its ticks.
The Mahatmas go a step
“ further. With their great knowledge of natural laws they are able
to communicate with us without using any apparatus at all.’
'i “ ‘But can you give me any details of the precipitation ?’
“ ‘ No; the Mahatmas only communicate with pupils who will not
“ unwisely divulge anything. You can easily imagine the reason why
“ this knowledge should be kept so secret. Were it possessed by a
f‘ criminal it might be put to dreadful purposes.’ . . .
“ Mrs. Besant repeated that she had made her startling statement
‘‘ in the lecture deliberately, adding that there were many persons
“ who knew her and would accept her statements as true, but who
“ might not believe in Madame Blavatsky, because, Mrs. Besant was
“ careful to add, they had not enjoyed the advantage of knowing that
“ lady.”
;
♦
*
*
♦
*
Mrs. Besant did not overrate the extent of her public credit. She
was implicitly believed by many who would not have troubled their
heads at all over an assertion of Madame Blavatsky’s. A “ boom ”
was the immediate result—the second big boom in the society’s
history. . Mrs. Besant had the satisfaction of seeing her statement
honoured with a salvo of leading articles. “ Can it be,” the Daily
Chronicle exclaimed, “ that there are things in heaven and earth which
philosophy and science have not yet dreamed of?”—(Daily Chronicle,
August 31.) And it opened its columns to a flood of correspondence
on Theosophy and things occult. Day after day a crop of letters
attested the public appetite for the marvellous.
The Theosophical Society has a sort of Press department, the
business of which is to get up sham fights in newspapers in
order to advertise the society ; and whenever the excitement
�2Ö
ISIS VERY I1UCH LN VEILED.
seemed to flag some member or other contributed a screed
which revived it. The time was well chosen. It was the “silly
season,” and under cover of Mrs. Besant more cautious papers than
the Chronicle were glad to let the Mahatma divide attention with the seaserpent and the giant gooseberry. The Theosophical Society reaped a
fine harvest; though some complaints were heard that the new inquirers
alter truth addressed themselves more to the marvels which had attracted
them than to the philosophisings to which Mrs. Besant had designed
the marvels as a bait. However, if their interest was tepid on this side of
Theosophy, their curiosity on the other side achieved small gratifica
tion. In Mrs. Besant s words, “The Mahatmas only communicate
with pupils who will not unduly divulge anything.”
But, as we have seen, what Mrs. Besant did divulge was enough
to convey to the public certain definite impressions : to wit,
that she had received letters in a certain handwriting, which did
not come through the post, but “ in what some would call a miraculous
fashion,” and that these letters were, in fact, “ precipitated ” by the
Mahatmas out of thin air.
Also that she had satisfied herself
ot the above propositions by evidential processes as certain as the
assurance of her own “sense” and “reasoning I acuity ” that her
audience were before her as she spoke.
And now let us see what were the facts on the strength of which
Mrs. Besant made these astonishing statements. So far, I have been
occupied necessarily with putting on record matters of history open to
any careful student of the subject. From this point I shall be dealing
with a side of Isis which up to this moment has been kept closely
veiled indeed.
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
■
CHAPTER
27
I *
VI.
ENTER THE MAHATMA.
“Answer the question I’ve put you so oft. . . . Give us a colloquy,
something to quote. Make the world prick up its ear ! ”—Master
Hugues, of Saxegotha.
“ Thus has a Master spoken, and .> . the word of a guardian of the
Esoteric Philosophy is authoritative.”—“Introduction to Theosophy,” by
Annie Besant.
Madame Blavatsky died May 8, 1891. Who was to succeed her as
hierophant of the mysteries of Tibet ? There was none among her
disciples who could aspire to fill that role with anything resembling the
hierophantine proportions of Madame herself. But Mrs. Besant, whose
conversion had been much advertised to the public, was undoubtedly
more fitted to pass muster as a prophetess than any of the others.
The brief and late character of her acquaintance with Madame
was rather in her favour than otherwise, since it had left undisturbed in
her ardent mind a loftier conception of Madame’s ethical character
than had been affected for some time past by some who had known her
longer. Mrs. Besant was even understood to be in some sense desig
nate for the succession.
Officially, however, she was subordinate to Colonel Olcott, the
president, then in India, and to Mr. William Q. Judge, vice-president,
and head of the faithful in America.
It soon appeared that the latter gentleman, at any rate, did not
mean his claims to Theosophical prominence to be ignored.
In reply to the announcement of “H.P.B.’s” death (Theosophists are wont to refer to their foundress, as the ancient Hebrews to
the Deity, under the guise of initials) Mr. Judge promptly cabled to
�28
ISIS VERY MUCH LNVEILED.
“ Do nothing till I come.”
Avenue-road was at first inclined to resent this ukase.
But Mr. Judge soon put a new face on matters when he arrived.
That was a time of sore searchings of heart. With “ H.P.B.’s ” death
the society’s one link with its unseen guides was broken, and “Masters ’*
had let a fortnight elapse without giving any sign that they survived the
decease of their high-priestess. William Q. Judge was to change all that.
On the evening of May 23 (he lost no time after his
the “cabinet”arrival), Mr. Judge suggested to Mrs. Besant that as
missive,
they were in sore need of some assurance from Masters,
they should repeat an old recipe of Madame Blavatsky’s
for bringing those august beings to a point. He proposed that they
should write a certain question on paper, put it in an envelope, shut
that into a certain cabinet in “ H.P.B.’s ” room at Avenue-road, and
invite the Masters to “precipitate” replies.
Mrs. Besant agreed. Mr. Judge himself wrote the question and
closed the envelope, and put it into the cabinet.
Mrs. Besant did not stay in the room through the process of
incubation.
For “ He that hath ears to hear, let him hear,” the
Theosophic scripture reads, “ He that hath eyes to see, let him put
his Head in a Bag.”
After due delay, Mr. Judge took the letter out again. On his
showing it to Mrs. Besant, judge of that lady’s emotion at the discovery
that at the end of the question stood the word
“Yes”
traced apparently in red chalk ; also, a little lower down, the words
“ And Hope,”
with the impression, in black carbon, of a peculiar seal, representing
a cryptograph M. (A simple way to produce this appearance is to
hold a seal in candle-smoke and impress with that.)
THE “ MAHATMA’S SEAL."
IMPRESSION SHOWING CRYPTOGRAPH.
�ISIS VERY MWH UNVEILED.
What need of further witness that the thing was the result of
psychic “precipitation” from Madame Blavatsky’s “Mahatma^M,”
away in Tibet ? If that gentleman had not, in his communications to
Madame, been observed to use a seal, still he certainly used to scribble
them in the same sort of red chalk, and he certainly used to sign him
self similarly M.
Note one point here. It was not Mahatma M, but Mahatma K. H.,
who used to be the more prolix correspondent in Madame Blavatsky’s
time, and whose handwriting appeared accordingly in copious specimens
and comparisons with her own, in the published Report of the
Psychical Research Committee.
No specimens were there given of the writing which Madame called
Mahatma M’s : there were but a few scraps of it available.
When, therefore, Mr. William Q. Judge conjured a letter from him
(I use “ conjure ” in its old-fashioned sense, of course), it was not
possible for Mrs. Besant to compare it with any published specimens
of the same script (with private specimens I fancy she had never been
favoured), even if the extremely scanty and hurried nature of the
message, and the temper of Mrs. Besant’s mind had not in themselves
forbidden any such partial measure of verification.
It is true that a few months later Mrs. Besant felt able to affirm
with the utmost confidence (as we have seen) that the handwriting was
“the same as that which Madame Blavatsky was accused of pro
ducing,” and this at first sight appears to refer to the “ K.H.” script,
which afforded the gravamen of Mr. Hodgson’s Report. In that case
what Mrs. Besant asserted was that the writing was the same as that
which was not even supposed to be by the same person.
«
*
*
*
♦
Next morning, there was a meeting of the “ Inner Group,” at
which Mr. William Q. Judge at once took up that position of Senior
Chela to which his services, as postman of the Mahatmas so well
entitled him. There is some oath or other of , equality with fellow
�30
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
members and of obedience to its head which members of th:s Esoteric
Section have to take : Mr. Judge pointed out that it was quite un
necessary for him to take this oath.
To which end he produced not only a letter from
the
note
Madame Blavatsky, but one from Mahatma M, which
THz seal” he had personally received in America, he said. Its
missive.
contents he did not feel able to communicate to others
who could not yet aspire to be on corresponding terms with the Great
Unseen : what he did show was the signature and seal impression
(which exactly resembled that “precipitated” in the cabinet over
night). He specially begged those present to take note of the seal;
“for,” said Mr. Judge, “they might have need to recognise it on some
future occasion.”
With eager eyes they all obeyed; each aspiring young chela fluttered
with the hope (for Mrs. Besant had noised the cabinet business about,
and it seemed to rain missives) that he too might soon be blest
with one.
Mr. Judge is a man of some foresight. But that was not precisely
what he had in his mind when he bade them note the seal.
*****
Three days after this (May 27) there was a meeting of the Esoteric
Section Council, to decide how the section should in future be governed,
its head being gone.
It had been expected that Mrs. Besant, having assumed the role
of Teacher and Expounder in succession to her friend, would succeed
her also as official head of the Esoteric Section Council. But William
Q. Judge had drafted a plan under which the Council was to dissolve,
and its powers be delegated to Mrs. Besant and himself as joint “Outer
Heads”—the Inner Heads being, of course, Mr. Judge’s august corre
spondents in the Himalayas.
Mrs. Besant, it seems, was more than content, in
’he “judge’s view of Mr. Judge’s newly-developed occult powers,
plan is right”with a position of “high collateral glory.”
But it was
missive.
hardly to be expected that the scheme should not be
exposed to some discussion and criticism from other
�ISIS VERY MUCH LNVEILED.
3r
members of the Council. At any rate, the Mahatma evidently deemed
the occasion to be a dignus vindice nodus. For what happened ?
As Mrs. Besant, who took the chair and expounded the new
scheme, was turning over her papers on the table, there fluttered
out a little slip of paper, at which she just glanced, and was
about to put it by, when William Q. Judge pointedly asked her
what it was ?
The slip of paper bore the words in red pencil—
“judge’s plan is right.”
Signature and seal as before.
Tableau !
Round it went from hand to hand. None questioned that paper
and script alike had just been “precipitated ” into their midst by “ the
Master.” Thanks to Mr. Judge’s foresight, as we have just seen, all
were in a position to recognise the seal.
Under these circumstances discussion was obviously out of place.
William Q. Judge at once went and took his seat at Mrs. Besant’s side,
and “Judge’s plan ” was unanimously adopted !
*****
It will hardly be believed, but it is, nevertheless, a fact, which I
challenge Mrs. Besant to contradict, that when that lady, on a public
platform, pledged the evidence of her senses, her sanity, and her
reasoning faculties, &c., &c., to having received messages from the
Mahatmas—messages which, as she assured the subsequent inter
viewer, came “ not through the post ” but by “ precipitation ” “ in
a way which some people would call miraculous ”—these two docu
ments, produced as has been described, and only these, were all the
pieces justificatives that she had to go upon.
But the vice-president’s Mahatma had only made a beginning.
There was more, much more, to come. It will be my privilege to
present the reader, in succeeding Chapters, with fac-similes of several
of his more interesting compositions.
�32
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
CHAPTER
VII.
EVERY MAN HIS OWN MAHATMA.
“ The T. S. is the agency chosen by the Masters . . . but They
do not directly guide, save where guidance is strenuously sought and
eagerly obeyed.”—“ Introduction to Theosophy,” by Annie Besant.
It was not surprising that the Vice-President, finding the Mahatma so
complaisant, should hasten to exploit him to the utmost. The resump
tion of the broken communication could not fail to restore the confidence
of doubting disciples both in the society itself and in the favoured chela,
who could not only, Glen dower-like, “call spirits from the vasty
deep,” but also, to the satisfaction of Theosophic Hotspurs, “make
them come.” Forthwith letters began to be showered about among such
persons as it was considered desirable to keep up to the mark, in
which the sentiments of William Q. Judge were endorsed by the
Mahatma. Of those two it might truly be said that “ their unanimity
was wonderful.”
One of the first recipients was Mr. Bertram Keightley,
the “ masters a gentleman whose services to Theosophy have been of
watch us” a material kind, and whose zeal has been rewarded
missive.
more than once by gratifying marks of approbation from
Tibet. In fact, his experience, like that of Countess
Wachtmeister and some other liberal friends of the society, suggests
the formula: “ Put a donation in the slot and you will receive a
revelation.” For the Mahatma obligingly honours the bills of the
society.
Under date May 29, 1891, the Vice-President wrote to Mr.
�COLONSL H. S. OLCOTT.
(From a photograph by Messrs. Elliott & Fry, Baker-street, W.)
�i
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
33
Keightley from Avenue-road a Pauline epistle, in which he says :—
Fear not, Bert !
in writing.
Masterswatch us,and since May 8 have sent wordhere
Close beside the signature of “ William Q. Judge ” appeared in solemn
confirmation the M signature and seal impression—“ precipitated,”
doubtless, during transit among Her Majesty’s mails. As the recipient
was at Adyar, Madras, and therefore, some thousands of miles nearer
the home of the Mahatmas than Mr. Judge, it will be seen to what
roundabout methods the Master was compelled in order to maintain his
determination to have his messages ushered into the world in some
connexion or other with the one favoured disciple.
*****
Another recipient was important for other reasons
the "judge !sthan Mr. Keightley.
Babula, a low-caste Hindu, forthe friend” merly Madame Blavatsky’s personal servant, was at this
missive. . time in a position of trust at the Theosophic quarters
at Adyar.
Since then he has got into trouble
with his employers, like others of Madame’s former confidants.
But in July, 1891, Babula was still in authority. at Adyar, and
the vice-president thought it worth while to convince him that he,
Judge, was his friend.
A letter, dated some weeks later than Mr.
Keightley’s, from Avenue-road, terminated with the signature,
Your friend,
YIwxapm. Q. Judge.
Under the words “Your friend,” the ever-officious Mahatma has
drawn a line, at the end of which he
has solemnly inscribed “ YES,” and
his signature and seal. The seal is,
as usual, impressed in black carbon ;
the writing is in red pencil ; and
Judge’s signature is in ordinary ink.
Pity that the famous Mr. Codlin
had not a Mahatma to back him thus conveniently in his assevera
tions that “ Codlin’s the friend, not Short.”
*
*
*
*
*
.j
c
�ISIS VERY MICH UNVEILED.
34
Parallel to this corroborative use of the Mahatma’s
** master seal, though belonging to a different period of the
agrees ”
story, was the case of another letter of Mr; Judge’s
missive.
to a brother official, in which, after expressing certain
the
views, Mr. Judge used these words:—
I believe the Master agrees with me, in which case I will ask him to put
his seal here.
Plump on the written word came the seal. Inimitable Mahatma!
'■
*
*
*........................... ♦
*.
Mrs. Besant’s previous “ communications,” as we have seen, did
not come through the post. But during that July Mr. Judge seems to
have left Mrs. Besant’s side for the express purpose of enabling his
Mahatma to give her an exhibition of his powers in this special line of
“ precipitation ” during postal transit.
July 21, 1891, was the date of one such performance ; which included
signature and seal complete. I pass over this and some equally common
place missives, which Mrs. Besant received at various dates, all equally
under Mr. Judge’s auspices, in order to deal more fully with one particular
one in which she was favoured with a “test condition.”
For lo ! on cutting the envelope open in the usual way, along the
top edge, Mrs. Besant observed a line or so of pencilling inside
written partly on the upper flap, partly on the under flaps, of the
adhesive part of the envelope.
Here was proof indeed of powers occult! For this
must obviously have been written or “precipitated”
the
enve- after the envelope was stuck zip : and there it was inside!
lope trick
por a Mahatj-Qa, of coursej it was as easy to produce
it so as in any other way. He might do it in mere
artless absence of mind.
Ingenuous Mrs. Besant ! Unfortunately for the test, the feat is
equally easy for any commonplace mortal—though in his case it would
hardly be done quite artlessly. The trick was first shown me by a
student of “occultism ”—a Theosophist, in fact. But it is a very o’d
affair, and can be found in any book of parlour magic. It might be
called “ Every Man his own Mahatma.”
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
35
An envelope has four flaps. Three of these are stuck together
in manufacture, but with a much less adhesive sort of gum than
that which is put on the remaining flap to be stuck up by the user.
ENVELOPE, INSIDE VIEW.
OUTSIDE VIEW, SHOWING INSERTION
It is generally quite easy to insert a penknife behind the bottom
flap, as in the accompanying cut, and so make entrance and exit for a
slip of paper. On this slip you write the words backwards, as they would
appear in a looking-glass, using a black pencil of the “ copying ” kind.
You then pass the slip in, push and shake it into the right position,
press till you feel sure the inside flaps have taken the impression, and
then out with your slip by the door it came in at. Moisten and fix the
flap again, and the “ precipitation ” is complete. A child can do it.
A Mahatma, of course, produces the result by mere psychic effort.
But it is a curious coincidence that M on this occasion abandoned
his usual red pencil for the black one which you or I would use if we
were playing just the trick described.
No doubt he felt that a more satisfactory test would have been
wasted on Mrs. Besant.
Others, however, were a little more exacting. The story enters
here on a less smooth course.
C 2
�36
ISIS VERY MUCH LNVEILED.
CHAPTER
VIII.
THE ADVENTURES OF A SEAL.
“ O that Heaven had set a seal upon men, that we might know them,
honest from dishonest! ”—Euripides.
From the previous record of Colonel Olcott — described by
Madame Blavatsky herself, in an epigrammatically candid moment, as
“ a psychologised baby ”—he is almost the last person whom one
would have expected to lead the way in any sceptical examination of
“ miracles.”
And no doubt he might have been content, like Mrs. Besant, to
open his mouth and shut his eyes and take whatever Mr. Judge should
send him, so long as that gentleman's thaumaturgy was confined to
benefiting the common cause. But it was another matter when the
vice-president’s Mahatma showed a tendency to favour the vice-pre
sident, and that at the expense of the president himself. Had the
oracle said “ Olcott's plan is right,” and declared that Olcott was the
“friend,” “not Lancelot nor another”; had it made Olcott, and not
Judi,e Outer Head with Mrs. Besant—the president’s ears might have
been an inch longer, and the course of Theosophic history have been
changed.
But there was, from the first, about Mr. Judge s Mahatma a certain
crudity, a lack of tact in dissembling favouritism, which was bound,
human nature being what it is, to make enemies.
On the decease of “H.P.B.,” President Olcott, like Vice-President
Tudge had hurried to the headquarters at Avenue-road. He had to
come from India, however, and the American disciple naturally out-ran
him. When the former arrived, the latter’s Mahatma was already in
full swing. On hearing of his performances with the seal, a' look of
more than usual intelligence may have crossed the president’s mild
and venerable features; but, like Brer Rabbit, he wasnt sayin
nuffin,” “he just lay low.”
�TSI8 VERY MUCH IE VEILED.
37
That busy July, ’91, the period of Mahatma M’s greatest activity,
was also marked by the assembling at Avenue-road of one of the
periodical conventions of Theosophic Europe. Some conversation
occurred between the president and vice-president about the expenses
of this convention, and the former, being “H.P.B.’s ” legatee, mentioned
a happy thought of his, of selling some of the jewels that lady had left
behind her, and giving the proceeds as her posthumous contribution to
the expenses.
But here, too, Mr. Judge was prepared to “go one
THE
better,” as his countrymen say, than the president“withold” legatee. He responded airily that Colonel Olcott need
missive.
not trouble himself about it, as “ Master ’ had promised
him (Judge) that the cash should be forthcoming, and
also that he would convey a “ message ” on the subject to Olcott
himself.
The Colonel waited for his message. None came.
The Colonel jogged Mr. Judge’s memory. Mr. Judge said he had
no more to tell.
But that very day, on sitting down at his writing-table, and lifting
up a piece of blotting-paper, the Colonel found under it a piece of
peculiar paper, reading as in' the following facsimile (reds and blacks
as per former samples) :—
�38
ISIS VE KY MUCH UNVEILED.
Now, Colonel Olcott thought he recognised that particular quality
of paper, and also, so far as it was legible, that seal-impression. The
facsimile here necessarily makes it much clearer. In the original the
impression was curiously faint and vague, as if the Master did not
wish, in the Colonel’s case, to burst that seal upon him all at once;
but preferred the manner of Tennyson’s Freedom, who “ part by part
to men revealed The fulness of her face.”
So Brer Rabbit continued to say nuffin’, and to lie low.
Presently Mr. William Q. Judge left on the same writing-table the
following note (being scribbled on a torn-off scrap of paper, it also
has rather a Mahatmic look. But that is accidental) :—
“ Dear Olcott ” “ looked ” accordingly ; and sure enough, in the
ordinary envelope of a letter, previously opened and put by on the
table, there was a piece of paper bearing a message with all the proper
Mahatma-marks about it. And this time the Mahatma had taken
heart and 11 precipitated ” a decently clear impression of the seal.
And then the Colonel “smiled a sorter sickly smile.” For now he
did recognise that seal. And this is its story.
*
»
Back in the palmy days of 1883, or ever the marvels of “H.P.B.”
were besmirched by slanderous tongues, the Colonel was in a certain
city of the Panjab. Passing an Urdu seal-engraver’s shop in the
bazaar, he turned in and ordered the man to make a seal bearing the
cryptograph signature which “H.P.B.” identified as that of the “Master
of Wisdom,” Mahatma Morya.
�ISIS VERY ML CH UNVEILED.
What did the Colonel want the seal for?
ffiimself:—
39
Let him explain
An idea occurred to me (he writes) of sending through “ H.P.B.,”
.as a playful present to my .Master M, a seal bearing a fac-simile of his crypto
graph.
Ah odd idea, this “ playful present ” of the Colonel’s. Had the
.seal been intended for use by an ordinary person — by “ H.P.B.” her
self, for instance—there would have been some sense in it. But the
Mahatma, of course, who “ precipitated ” his letters and his signature
psychically, might just as well “ precipitate ” the latter in the shape of
a seal impression as otherwise, if he wanted to ; and where, then,
should the use of a brass seal come in ? However, as the Colonel says,
the present was merely “playful.”
Back went the Colonel to Madras, where Madame was, and
presented the seal to her, with a “ jocular remark ” (I am again
quoting his own account). Madame’s keen eye dwelt on it a moment,
and then she pointed out that the Colonel, in his jocularly playful
mood, had made a slight mistake. “The Master’s cryptograph was
pot correctly drawn,” according to the pattern already familiar to
recipients of his precious missives. There was a twiddle too much, or
a twiddle too little, in it. The Colonel himself saw the blunder when
it was pointed out, and he now declares that he would know it
anywhere.
For this sufficient reason the “ playful present ” was not sent on to
the Himalayas (Heaven knows, by the way, by what astral form of
parcels-post service the Colonel had expected it to be sent) ; neither
did it appear in any of the communications vouched for by Madame.
It went into Madame’s despatch-box, along with a lot of other
mystical odds and ends, properties of the occult stage; and among
these it was remarked, as late as 1888, by the Mr. Keightley already
mentioned, who was then living with her in Lansdowne-road.
This gentleman asked the prophetess what the little brass seal
might be ? Madame Blavatsky’s answer—a characteristically racy
“ fragment of her prophet .voice’’—was :—
�40
ISIS VERY MUCH TjNVEILED.
*•' ■
“Oh, it’s only a flap-doodle of Olcott’s.”
In the same year, at a time when William Q. Judge was staying
with Madame, Mr. Judge’s Mahatma evidently determined to overlook
the inaccuracy in the seal, and to make use of it for the first time
to save himself the trouble of a psychic signature.
' He did this, of course, in a letter of Mr. William Q. Judge’s own,
and in a sense endorsing Mr. William Q. Judge’s wishes—in. fact, the
letter was the one recorded in the last chapter, in which the Master’s
seal came so plump upon the disciple’s prayer for a sign.
I have not mentioned beiore, however, that the recipient of this
8 letter was Colonel Olcott. He presumably recognised, then aS now,
his own “ playful present,” his own “ flap-doodle ” ; but he appears to
have let it pass in silence.
From this date the seal seems to have disappeared from among
Madame' Blavatsky’s belongings. It was, of course, intrinsically
valueless.
But in 1890 it turned up again—in New York, and in
the
close contiguity with Mr. Judge. Madame sent a
telegram
message through Mr. Judge to a disciple, then in
missive.
America, who happened to be the Mr. Keightley who
had remarked the “ flap-doodle of Olcott’s ” at Lansdowne-road. The context, which is before me as I write, shows that
Madame was persuading this disciple to take some course distasteful
to him. Judge added his persuasions to hers. But what was bound
to determine the disciple was the discovery on receiving the missive
from Mr. Judge’s hands, that the Mahatma had added his vote in
transitu by endorsing the word “ RIGHT,” in red pencil, with crypto
graph and impression of the Panjab seal.
Mr. Keightley, too, must have recognised the “ flap-doodle ” ; but
he, too, like Olcott, said never a word. He did, indeed, go so far as
to ask Judge if he had affixed the seal ? But on receiving a blandly
surprised assurance that Mr. Judge did not so much as know there
was a seal affixed, he let the matter drop.
These are, so far as I know, the only two instances in evidence of
the use of this peculiar seal in Mahatma missives during the life-time of
�ISIS VERY MUCH LNVEILED.
41
Madame Blavatsky, and, as was to be expected from her objection to
the seal, neither missive was among those vouched for by her, for the
message from herself to New York was telegraphed, and it was the
telegraph-form at the New York end that the Mahatma endorsed.
Nevertheless, it is clear that no intimate of Madame’s would get hold
of the seal and make use of it for bogus Mahatma missives under her
very nose, unless he were under the impression either that she had
it for that purpose herself, or that she might be relied on at least not
to “ peach ” on a chela who used it.
But why did neither Colonel Olcott nor Mr. Keightley speak ?
The only answer I can suggest is that while Madame Blavatsky was in
the flesh the faithful thought twice before they expressed a doubt about
anything or anybody. They were accustomed to take their marvels as
they found them, and be thankful.
Otherwise, they might at least have pointed out to Mr. Judge, in
order that he might in turn apprise his Mahatma, whose supernal know
ledge seems here to have been somewhat at fault, what a fatal blunder
he was making in palming off upon the faithful a bogus edition of his
own cryptograph, known as such by three of the faithful themselves.
However, there are the facts ; and but for the Mahatma’s trop de z'cle
in pushing his favourite chela!s occult claims immediately on Madame
Blavatsky’s decease, I fear we should never have been vouchsafed this
instructive side-light on an earlier pericd of the Theosophical Society.
These Adventures of a Seal supply the clue to the great game of
bluff between the two highest Theosophical officials which must be
depicted in the next chapter.
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
42
CHAPTER
IX.
'
THE CLIMAX OF THEOSOPHIC BROTHERHOOD.
“ To form the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood of Humanity.”—
Theosophical Society, Object I.
“ Pestling a poisoned poison behind his crimson lights! ”—“Maud.”
We left the president of the Theosophical Society
THE
“ master staring at the impression of his own “ flap-doodle ” seal
on that which purported to be a missive from the
Mahatma.
The purport of the missive was precisely what the
prescient Judge had foretold. Colonel Olcott was not to sell the
Blavatsky jewels, as the money would be provided.
Having shown it to a brother member, the Colonel replaced it in
the envelope, and went off to have a few words with Mr. William Q
Judge.
He remarked to Judge that he had missed a certain brass seal from
among Madame Blavatsky’s relics, and described the Panjab seal
and the story of its making; not mentioning, however, the name of the
exact city where it was made. Had Judge seen the seal ?
Judge answered in the negative.
Upon which the Colonel
remarked meaningly (I quote his own account) that he “ hoped no
scoundrel would get possession of it, and use it to give colour to bogus
Mahatma messages,” adding that he would at once recognise an
impression from the seal.
He did not mention that he had looked for and found the missive
in the envelope.
will provide •’
missive.
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
43
After two days he looked into the envelope for that missive again.
It was gone.!
Some judicious hand had removed it. “Judicious,” says the Dic
tionary, “ literally: of or pertaining to a Judge.” Colonel Olcott con
cluded with some assurance that the hand which had removed that
missive, the hand which had put it there, and the hand which had
written it, were one and the same hand, and that hand William Q.
Judge’s. That is a conclusion which we must leave the two gentlemen
to settle between them.
*****
But note the sequel. The writer of the missive, whoever he was,
was as good as his word.
When the Convention in due course was held, it was announced
that a donation had been contributed towards the expenses in a peculiar
way.
There had appeared to one of the brethren one afternoon a dark and
■ mysterious Oriental figure, who gave no name, but deposited two Bank
of England £10 notes (from Tibet ?), which were backed with the
familiar red cryptograph, after which he, like Mr. Lewis Carroll’s Snark,
“ softly and silently vanished away.”
It will not surprise the astute reader to learn that the brother favoured
with this substantial spectre was William Q. Judge.
Well, there was the £20, and the vice-president's reputation as an
occultist stood higher than ever. There was a time, years before, when
the society had made much of a similar vision of its president’s, one
which, the Colonel used to explain, had first assured him of the truth
. of Madame Blavatsky’s doctrines. On his asking for a sign, the Colonel’s
' figure, which was, of course, like Mr. Judge's, the “ astral body ” of a
• Mahatma, had materialised its turban, and disappeared into several
yards of substantial textile fabric. “ And here,” the Colonel was wont
to conclude the story, “ here, you see, is the turban!”—whipping it
: from his coat-tail pocket. Ah ! that was in the palmy eighties. But
now where was he ? What was a chela who conjured up a turban
beside one who could conjure up £20 hard cash—“ on the table,” as
Hilda Wangel would say ?
In a word, Colonel Olcott was altogether thrown into the shade by
�ISIS
44
IEBY MICH
unveiled.
this bold stroke, and had not even the face to suggest that perhaps
Mr. Judge’s story was only a donor’s graceful way of conveying assist
ance from his own pocket. The Colonel pulled rather a sour face,
however, over the heavy sum with which the society’s chest was debited
when Mr. Judge’s expenses at the Convention came to be paid. For,
Judge having attended in his official capacity, it was the Colonel’s
treasury at Adyar which had to foot the bilL Personally, I consider
the miracles cheap at the price.
This reminds me of the matter of Madame Blavatsky’s Rosicrucian
jewel, in which also the Mahatma stole an amusing march on the
Colonel. This was a pendant set with gems, which had the property of
changing colour with every change in Madame’s health—so she and
the faithful Olcott used to swear. The Colonel had his own ideas about
the future of this mystic gewgaw ; but what was his disgust on getting
to Avenue-road to learn that the Master had sent a message for it to be
given to Judge, and that Mrs. Besant had accordingly handed it over !
Nor was the Colonel’s chagrin lightened by the fact that the forgetful
Mahatma attempted (through Judge, of course) to put him off the track
of the jewel by a message to quite another effect—an exceedingly mis
leading message.
For all I know, the gift was as valueless intrinsically as the brass
seal; but Theosophically it was a distinct score for Mr. Judge and his
Mahatma thus to amalgamate the two mystic apparatuses in one firm’s
hands, so to speak.
*
*
•
*
#
#
After the passages described above, Mr. Judge’s Mahatma
THE “ inner was chary of subjecting any more epistolary efforts to
group”
the eye of Colonel Olcott. And he seems to have
missive.
become more cautious altogether. In the following
September, however, he succumbed to the temptation of
intervening again in the administration of the society. A letter with the
usual trimmings was enclosed to the Inner Group, bearing upon its
constitution and future changes, in one of Mr. Judge’s on the same
subject and in the same sense (September 14).
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
45
Tust at this time Colonel Olcott was visiting America, en route
for Japan, where he was to teach the Buddhists their own religion in
a flying visit. He took the opportunity of making some more pointed
representations to Mr. Judge on the vagaries of his Master. The result was prompt and significant.
'
During the very next month Mrs. Besant, then preparing for her
trip to India, received a cablegram from the vice-president in America
to this effect:—
You are desired not to go to India remain where you are grave'
danger Olcott await further particulars by an early mail.
At Avenue-road this mysterious telegram was „at first
read in the sense, “ Grave danger to Olcott.” The
™E
president was just then due at Tokyo, and there was a
Olcott» report of an earthquake thereabouts. For a while there.
missive.
was a great flutter over this convincing case of
Mahatmic prescience. When, however, the “ early mail
arrived with Mr. Judge’s explanatory letter,. quite. a different com
plexion was put on the telegram. After reading this letter, and one
from the inevitable Mahatma which Mr. Judge enclosed, the conclusion of the Inner Group was that the “ grave danger ” against which
the Master warned Mrs. Besant was “from Olcott.” The Tibetan
founder of the society, in short, warned Mrs. Besant against imperil
ling her safety in the neighbourhood of its president !
The Mahatma had declared war on Colonel Olcott.
This was the first shot in the campaign.
But what could this danger from Colonel. Olcott be? Mr. Judge
and his Mahatma left that darkly vague. Some of their friends in
England dotted the i’s and ’’crossed the t’s for them. It is hardly
credible, but the suggestion was nothing less preposterous than that
Colonel Olcott intended to poison Mrs. Besant 1
I have no great veneration for Colonel Olcott’s character, and none
at all for his intelligence; but I frankly apologise to him for having to
mention this astounding nonsense in connexion with his name. I
.<
�46
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
mention i simply in order to explain one of the documents which
follow, and to throw a light on the minds of the colleagues who made
attabeh‘letVed>the ChTgS' and 1 supP°se L need scarcely add®that I ■
attach to it no other value whatever. Colonel Olcott is about as:
remote as it is possible to conceive from - the sort of- stuff of which
murderers are made. I am .sure he never had and never will have any
San in SeM’0 ?
°r anybod>' else- lha"
Man m the Moon. Having said so much to make any misunderstandmg impossible I return to the suspicions or pretended suspicions
of the Colonel’s professed “Brothers.”
^prcions
Positively, the only material which these ladies and gentlemen had
to work on was an innocent conversation of the Colonel’s with a friend
when MrsbjBCt °f.P°,SOnS’ Indian and other> which took place at a date
when Mrs. Besant was not yet even a member of the society I The
evidence —save the mark !—was such as ordinary non-Theosophical
tfhehWf°illddn g'7ffGVen a d°S a bad name on. But Mahatmas and
their friends are different, and Mr. Judge’s Mahatma was well served.
For this trivial episode, buzzed about from mouth to mouth in con
nexion with the sinister hints of “Mahatma M,” sufficed to make
t is monstrous charge against their president currently believed at
Avenue-road for some weeks at least, by the very inmost and govern
ing circle of his colleagues, with Mrs. Besant at their head !
A belief once discarded, it is easy to deny that it ever existed.
But this particular belief, or half-belief, showed itself in action. Mrs
Besant deferred her visit to India, and to impatient Indian disciples
wrote that Master had forbidden her to come,” and “till that order
was countermanded ” she would not budge.
Now just pause a moment, and enjoy the exquisite irony of this
unique Slt^on. TheTheosophic Society was to be “the nucleus of a
Universal Brotherhood of Mankind.” At this moment, taking the three
chief exponents of this new Brotherliness, the president believed the vicepresident to be fabricating bogus documents ; the vice-president appa
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
47
rently believed the president to have designs to poison the highpriestess ; and the high-priestess, having these two beliefs to choose
from, coquetted at least, as we have seen, with the more heinous of
the two.
Other Theosophists appear from their course of action to have
accomplished the intellectual feat of believing both.
�48
ISIS VERY MICH UNVEILED.
CHAPTER
X.
THE MAHATMA TRIES THREATS.
“ Be these juggling fiends no more believed, that palter with us in a
double sense! ”—“ Macbeth.”
“ Masters, it is proved already that you are little better than false
knaves.”—“ Much Ado About Nothing.”
While the Mahatma was thus stealthily undermining the president,
he was also busy strengthening his own outworks. In December one
of the doubting ones, the Mr. Keightley who had been making up his
mind whether to believe his own eyes ever since June, 1890, received
in India a letter from Mr. Judge fortifying him against the heterodox
influences to which he would be exposed on Colonel Olcott’s return
to that country.
Mr. Judge warned his “dear Bert” that Olcott would
the “follow try to shake his faith in the genuineness of Mr. Judge’s
judge and Mahatma-missives ; that he might even have the basestick” missive, ness to suggest that they were fabricated by Mr. Judge
himself. On opening this letter, Mr. Keightley found
a small slip of peculiar paper, which turned out (on a prosaic scrutiny)
to be the sort of tissue which is used to separate the sheets of type
writing transfer paper. On this slip appeared in Mahatmic script the
words :—
Judge leads right. Follow him and stick!
There-was, however, no seal impression. The Mahatma had grown
chary of using that seal. From the material of this missive we gather
that the Mahatma is not so remote from typewriters as one would
�ISIS VERY MUCH. UNVEILED.
expect in the Himalayas ; from its diction we learn that, whatever the
failings of his English, the august being has a racy command of
Yankee.
I may remark here that when Mahatmas “precipitate” their own
notepaper, as well as the writing upon it, it has always been the etiquette
that the former should have an Indian look about it, however
European the latter might be. Even tissue, as in this case, is con
sidered more in keeping than commonplace stationery, with, perhaps,
the watermark of some English firm upon it.
But the “make”
preferred, alike now and in the Blavatsky days, is a peculiar
sort of hand-made rice-paper, which the Psychical Researchers had
some difficulty in tracking to the maker’s. They were not assisted by
Colonel Olcott. But now, the same mystic paper having turned up in
the productions of Mr. Judge's Mahatma (borrowed, perhaps, at the same
time as the seal?) the .Colonel resolves the mystery at once. Wishing
to suggest that Mr. Judge got it ready-made from Madame Blavatsky,
he mentions that Madame had gone about with a good supply
of
it, adding that it was originally bought in Cashmere.
He
had bought it himself at Jammos, in fact, as long
ago as 1883, just as he had also been the purchaser of the
brass seal; and just as he explains that the seal was got
merely as a “playful present,” so he represents the original purpose
of the Cashmere stationery as the humble one of “ packing books—it
being both cheap and strong.” From parcels post to astral note-paper
is a distinct rise. But who first promoted it ? Another side-light
unintentionally thrown on the old Blavatsky days 1
But to return to Mr. Judge’s Mahatma. His last attempt to bring
Colonel Olcott to a better mind by persuasion was made that autumn.
In October he had resorted to a bold device for overcoming scepticism,
which he and Mahatma Root Hoomi had patented in the early
Blavatsky days—that of waylaying (astrally, of course) the post-bag
01 some disconnected and quite unconscious correspondent of the
sceptic, and so introducing a message through an obviously untainted
channel. For instance, Mr. Hume once “ got a note from Koot Hoomi
�5°
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
inside a letter received through the post from a person wholly uncon
nected with our occult pursuits, who was writing to him on some muni
cipal business.” (“ Occult World,” p. 21.) The letter happened to have
a large and noticeable envelope, and long after, in the days of disillusion,
Mr. Hume discovered that Madame’s servant Babula had carried off
just such a letter from the postman for Madame, and then returned it
to him with an apology for the mistake. (S. P. R. Report, p. 275.)
In October, then, Colonel Olcott, who was just returnthe “judge ’ng to India, got a letter from a Mr. Abbott Clarkj
is not
of Orange County, California, a gentleman who was
the forger” under no sort of suspicion of having anything to do
missive.
with Mahatmas.
And in this, if you please, there
had somehow found its way into the envelope a slip of
paper bearing a message in the M script, with signature, but with seal
too blurred'io distinguish, in facsimile as follows :—
�ISIS VERY ML CH LNVEILED.
51
�'5^
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
seal, apparently by being rubbed with the finger. Across a margin of
the paper is the following postscript, in the black carbon usually
devoted to the seal impression :—
Rather cryptic, this missive ; but the meaning seems to be this.
The Mahatma has to explain to the suspicious Colonel several
things : why the missives habitually come in letters from Mr. Judge ;
why, nevertheless, Mr. Judge knows nothing of them ; why he, the Master,
has used a bogus seal which bungles his own cryptograph; and, above all,
why the impressions of that seal have been illegible ever since an
exposure of it was threatened. He hints, accordingly, that he “uses”
Mr. Judge to assist in some undefined psychic way in the precipitation
process ; but Judge’s part in this is unconscious—it must be “ when he
does not know.” Also, the thing precipitated “fades out often”—and
plump on the word comes an illustration.
In saying that “Judge did not write Annie” (z>., Mrs. Besant,
for this spirit is a familiar one), the Master is misinformed, as
we have seen. Mr. Judge had just “written Annie,” enclosing the
Master’s own warning against Colonel Olcott. Lastly, the remark
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
SY.
about “ facit per alium ” (the Mahatma can use a tag of lawyers’ Daem
on occasion) seems to mean that when Colonel Olcott had the “flap
doodle ” seal made he was unconsciously prompted by _ the Master
himself, who had now adopted it, overlooking the blunder in engraving.
The prescience which foresaw that the “ precipitation ” would give out
in just this letter is no less remarkable than that which provided for an
unexpressed doubt by the assurance, “ No, it is not pencil.
But for Colonel Olcott the gem of this letter was none of these.
It was the reference to the Panjab seal as the “ Lahore brass.”
All that Mr. Judge knew, as we have seen, was that the seal
was made at a “certain city in the Panjab.”
Mr. Judge’s
Mahatma assumes that this city was the capital of the province. It
was a likely guess—a good shot, if such a phrase may be used of the
mental processes of a Tibetan sage—and one calculated to end the
Colonel’s doubts—if correct. But that is just what it was not. The
city at which the Colonel got the seal was quite another city j so the
Mahatma, though he hints that he psychically presided over the
purchase, does not even know where that purchase took place !
The result of this unlucky lapse of memory on the part of the
Master was that the missive made bad worse. Despite the distance
of California, where Mr. Clark’s envelope was posted, from New York,
and the offices of Mr. William Q. Judge, the Colonel suspected Mr.
Judge’s hand in it. He wrote to Mr. Clark, and discovered that
Judge had spent two days in Orange County at the very date when the
Master availed himself of Mr. Clark’s envelope. Thereupon the
Colonel formed his own ideas as to how the Master had “ used ” his
favourite chela on that occasion.
Can we wonder that the Master was incensed by
the “ poison- this incorrigible scepticism—a spirit, as the Colonel
threat”
himself had formerly taught, and as the event was to
missive.
prove but too surely—fatal to Theosophy ?
Persuasion failing, the Master resorted to threats 1
In January, 1892, the Colonel received an amicable letter from
Mr. Judge, reproaching him for not writing. On opening it, he found
�54
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
written along the margin of the first page the following laconic message
in Mahatma script (signed, but again no seal: much reduced here) :—
“Him ” presumably means Judge. The bearing of the threat will be
intelligible to readers of the last Chapter. Certain rumours irom
Avenue-road made it intelligible also to Colonel Olcott. The Master
of Wisdom, the unapproachable sage of the Himalayas, He-Who-MustBe-Obeyed by Mrs. Besant and the whole Theos jphical Society, had
thrown off the mask of benignity. Here he was plainly adopting, as a
weapon against his own unlucky president, that impossible accusation
which repiesents the lowest point of ethical squalor yet touched, in
this story at any rate, by Theosophic “brotherhood”! This was
miching Mallecho, thought the Colonel ; it meant mischief with a,
vengeance. The voice was the voice of the Mahatma, but again the
Colonel thought it the hand of Judge. So he wrote with some
natural heat to ask that gentleman what he meant by his “ base
insinuation.”
Only to receive, however, the blandly innocent reply:—
I have puzzled my head over your reference to “ poison,” as if in one of
mine ; as I never referred to it I cannot catch on, and have given it up in
despair.
After this the Colonel seems to have given the Mahatma up in
despair, too. But the Mahatma, on his part, was busily pushing up a
column to take the Colonel in the flank, and bring this story to a
crisis.
Secure in the support of Mrs. Besant, he was to make the
pusillanimous president resign his office, and to enthrone William Q.
Judge in his place !
�ISIS VERY MUCH URVEILED.
CHAPTER
55
XI.
MRS. BESANT’S COUP DE MAIN.
“ I did my utmost to prevent a public Committee of Enquiry of an
official character.”—Mrs. Besant at T. S. Convention, July 12, 1894.
How even a “ psychologised baby ” like Colonel Olcott came to
succumb to a movement for ousting him from office, backed by such
methods as we have examined, is to me a mystery. No doubt he
had his own reasons for avoiding a contest in disclosures with his
old colleague Mr. Judge, who knows so much about Theosophy ever
since the days of its foundation. At any rate, succumb he did. On
receiving an emissary from Avenue-road, early in 1892, he threw up the
cards in the unequal game with the Mahatma, and formally resigned his
presidency.
Then was seen a touching sight. Cæsar pushed away the crown.
Mr. Judge was loth to succeed. Who could doubt it? Why, he got
a “ message ” countermanding the resignation, and forwarded it to the
Colonel (March, 1892), just too late to be acted on before the
American Convention in April, which, with decent reluctance,
acclaimed Mr. Judge for the vacant office.
But now came a hitch. Colonel Olcott took the anti-resignation
message au grand sérieux. He forgot all his doubts about Mr. Judges
Mahatma missives in his simple joy at the tenor of this last one.
It was but a typed copy which Mr. Judge sent him. Never mind,
it was a declaration of peace ; and if ever there was a man- of
peace it is the Colonel, despite his American brevet. He could not
�5&
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
disobey the Master ; he did withdraw his resignation. Such was his
answer to Mr. Judge.
Mr. Judge expressed his delight. But in absence of mind—
possibly excess of joy—he quite forgot to mention either the Master’s
message or the Colonel’s consent at Avenue-road when, in the
following July, the time came to make his succession to the Colonel’s
office definite.
The result was that Mr. Judge was then and there elected president
for life. Some voices were for a term; but Mrs. Besant arose
in her eloquence and “ swept up the floor’* (in the phrase of
one Theosophic enthusiast), and the election was “ for life.”
Alas ! Contracts entered into for that period are notoriously apt to
give out at an earlier date.
Perhaps one thing which explains the Colonel’s small show of fight
is the fact 'that he was to be consoled with an “ Olcott Pension
Fund.” Unhappily the treasurer defalcated some eight or nine thou
sand rupees, and then committed suicide. Ill-luck seemed to dog the
vanquished president.
But now came the turn of the tide.
On the announcement of Judge’s election, Colonel Olcott indig
nantly wrote to Avenue-road to point out that there was no vacancy.
And he printed in the Theosophist the Master’s message which had led
him to withdraw his resignation.
He did more. The Theosophist, the official journal of the Indian
section, has come to be Colonel Olcott’s private property, just as
Lucifer is Mrs. Besant’s, and The Fath Mr. William Q. Judge’s—an
illustration of the odd mixture of private and official capacities in this
society. And now the Colonel plucked up heart to publish in his
paper the first note publicly heard of criticism—yes, actual criticism—
of Mr. Judge s Mahatma.
Privately, there had -been some troubled bleatings heard already
among some of the less docile of the Theosophic sheep.
Mr. Judge
had been obliged to toke up the cudgels for the merits of some of his
Mahatma missives as philosophic compositions. I find him claiming
(in the true oracular spirit) that: —
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
57
A very truism, when uttered by a Mahatma, has a deeper
meaning for which the student must seek, but which he will lose if he stops
to criticise and weigh the words in mere ordinary scales.
A sentiment printed with approbation in Mrs. Besant’s paper.
Again, he is parrying inquisitive questions about the Master’s seal.
He “ does not know ” what they mean. An inquirer sends him a
sample letter with a good impression to look at—one which had come
from Mr. Judge himself, I presume—and gets it back with the
impression rubbed out (“it fades out often,” as we have seen
above), and the puzzled remark from Mr. Judge, “Where is your
seal ? I don’t see one.” Finally, pressed, Mr. Judge declares that
“ Whether He ” (the Master) “ has a seal, or uses one, is something
■on which I am ignorant.”
It was on this statement—which involves a total lapse of memory
on Mr. Judge’s part of events narrated in Chapter V.—that he was
challenged in the Theosophist of April, 1893, in an article signed by
Messrs. W. R. Old and S. V. Edge, both T.S. offic als (secretaries,
Indian section). The article is hardly what would be called trenchant
by non-Theosophical standards. But it just pointed out that little
discrepancy in a polite foot-note ; and that was enough.
If there is one thing more than another which is deemed to be bad
form in circles Theosophical, it is to corner a Theosophist on a
definite matter of fact. Anything undraped in verbiage is considered
nude, even to indecency. The voice of questioning has to be stifled
at once.
By virtue of their joint position as Outer Heads of the Esoteric
section, to which they were elected under warrant of the very seal in
question, Mrs. Besant and Mr. Judge promptly “suspended” Messrs.
Old and Edge from their Esoteric membership.
*****
In December, Mrs. Besant went to India. She had, therefore,
thrown over the Mahatma’s warning. But she had not thrown over
the Mahatma—not a bit.
She declared that nothing on earth
would induce her to give up believing that the missives were indeed
�ISIS VERY MUCH VNVEILED.
** precipitated” by Mahatma M, unless Mahatma M in person appeared
and repudiated them. If a person who had been told that the Man in
the Moon daily “ precipitated ” the Times leading articles should decline
to be convinced of the contrary till he heard it from the lips of the
Man in the Moon himself he would probably be “ of the same opinion
still ” for some considerable time.
In India, Mrs. Besant suddenly changed her mind. Had the
Master indeed appeared and fulfilled her conditions ?
She
does not say so. Yet it can scarcely have been on any mere,
dull ground of fact and argument.
She was presented with a set
of depositions establishing all of the substantial facts of this narra
tive, given under the names of those personally cognisant of them, with
Colonel Olcott at their head, and summed up in the form of certain
definite charges against William Q. Judge.
But many of these facts
she already knew herself, as well as anybody, and made naught of.
What did work the miracle, then ?—As far as I can make out, it
was this. Mrs. Besant sat at the feet of G. N. Chakravati. And
G. N. Chakravati just mentioned that he did not believe in Judge.
This is the Hindu gentleman who was sent to represent the
Theosophical Society at the Chicago Parliament of Religions, at an
expense of £500.
This is the teacher who has made
“ Annabai ” so far a Hindu that she now protests against harsh
mention even of the child-widow horrors, the 12,000 temple
prostitutes of Madras, and the other religious indecencies of
Hinduism. As Mr. Bradlaugh led Mrs. Besant from the Church to
Materialism, as Mr. Herbert Burrows went hand-in-hand with her from
Materialism to Madame Blavatsky, as Judge made her believe in
Judge, so she could only abandon Judge with the aid of G. N.
Chakravati.
Whatever the explanation, the fact remains that,
blessed by this worthy pundit, the case formulated against Mr. Judge,
became strong—convincing—irresistible. Mrs. Besant’s mind blossomed
in a day into the full-blown view that she had been deluded, that Judge
had himself written the missives to which she had pinned her faithwritten them all with his own hand.
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
59
Appalling bathos !—and one which an Enquiry must needs result in
publishing to all the world. Yet an enquiry there must be. The Indian
section was threatening to secede from the society if Mr. Judge s pre
sidency were confirmed with the scandal unsifted.
Judge himself,
offered the alternative by cablegram of resigning all his offices quietly or
lacing a “ full publication of the facts,” replied in a defiant sense which
showed his conviction that there were others to whom “ full publica
tion of the facts ” (which it was easy to threaten, but which it has been
left for an outsider to carry out) would be more ungrateful even than
to himself. What was Mrs. Besant to do ?
A happy thought struck her. She offered to adopt the charges,
turn prosecutor, and conduct the case against Mr. Judge herself.
The signatories of the evidence were delighted—especially Colonel
Olcott, who got behind Mrs. Besant now with the same alacrity as
previously behind Messrs. Old and Edge.
By this bold, yet simple stroke, the evidence, documents, and
whole control of the case passed into Mrs. Besant’s hands, where they,
as she fondly hopes, or hoped, now remain.
Not altogether 1
�6o
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED-.
■ ."¡..J
P
...
•
CHAPTER XII.
A MEETING OF THE (THEOSOPHICAL) PICKWICK CLUB.
The Chairman felt it his imperative duty to demand of the hon.
gentleman whether he had used the expression “ a humbug ” in a common
sense ?
Mr. Blotton had no hesitation in saying that he had not—he had used
the word in its Pickwickian sense. (Hear, hear.) He was bound to acknow
ledge that personally he entertained the highest esteem for the hon. gentle
man ; he had merely considered him a humbug in a Pickwickian point of
view.
Mr. Pickwick felt much gratified by the candid explanation of his hon.
friend. He begged it to be at once understood that his own observations had
been merely intended to bear a Pickwickian construction. (Cheers.)—The
Pickwick Papers,
We have now seen how, step by step, as by a resistless nemesis
the rival Theosophical leaders were led on to bring their quarrel to
that which neither of them had much stomach for—an inquiry into
evidence. Bluff meeting bluff, the thing got as far as the summoning
from three continents of a Committee of Investigation representing
both parties. “ Investigating ” hidden forces in nature, as we saw in
Chapter II., is one of the professed “Objects” of the Theosophical
Society. The' present chapter is to show what the Theosophical idea
of investigating is like.
There lies before me a pamphlet, reprinted from Lucifer of
August last, which bears the facetious title. “AN INQUIRY Into
�2SIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
6i
Certain Charges against the Vice-President, Held in London, July
1894.” Anybody is at liberty to get this publication and make
what head or tail of it he can.
The plain matter of fact which lay behind
vv'G'0M
the proceedings in question was this. Mrs.
Besant and Colonel Olcott had given away
J*
A _ \ their friends and compromised with Judge on
i fi VS/ 1 x Ae terms that he should give Olcott back his
fi
presidency, Judge’s election thereto being
declared null and void, while they on their part
should suppress the evidence which the Judicial
badge of the T.s.
Committee had been summoned to report on.
Mr. Judge had protested in a vehement circular, when first called
on by the President to appear before the committee, against one of his
accusers proposing to preside at his trial. There was reason in the
objection at the time.
He could not foresee that the proceedings
would take the form of the presiding judge and the counsel for the
prosecution combining to prevent the case from going to the jury.
This being the plain English of the affair, let us now see how it
reads translated into what I may call Theosophistry.
The first part of the pamphlet consists of the Judicial Committee's
minutes. Of this, six-sevenths is devoted to an “Address or the
President-Founder ” proving that they ought to do nothing. The
remaining page is devoted to doing it.
The “ charges of misconduct preferred by Mrs. Besant against the
vice-president ” are nowhere formally stated at all. They are inci
dentally summarised by the president as follows :—
“ That he practised deception in sending false messages, orders,
and letters, as if sent and written by ‘ Masters.’ . . . That he was
untruthful in various other instances enumerated.”
The bulk of the address is occupied in discussing with great
solemnity various reasons alleged by Mr. Judge why these charges
should not be gone into by the committee.
One or two of these, such as the vice-president’s discovery that . he
had never been really vice-presid.nt at all, and the contention that, which-
�-62
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED t
«ver way the decision went, it must “ offend the religious feelings ” of
some member or another, and that this was against the rules of the
society—these were, after the due amount of pomposity, declared
against by the president.
But there were two other pleas of such irresistible force and weight
that the president found himself convinced by them “ that this inquiry
must go no further.” Stripped of prolix circumlocutions, these may
be put as an alternative, thus:—
Either the Mahatma missives are genuine or they are fabricated.
(a) If found to be genuine, that implies the affirmation of the
existence of Mahatmas as a Theosophic dogma, and the abandonment
..of the society’s precious “ neutrality.” Which is unconstitutional.
(R) If found to be bogus missives produced by the vice-president,
..then it is obvious that he must have done it in his private capacity;
the production of bogus documents being no part of his official duties.
Therefore he cannot be tried for it by an official tribunal.
Could anything be more delicious than this dilemma? It is
.worthy of a trial scene in Gilbertian comic opera.
Mrs. Besant, like the president, was “ convinced that the point was
.rightly taken.” There was nothing more to be said.
The Judicial Committee “ resolved ” in the same sense, without any
inconvenient discussion, and forthwith committed hara-kiri with the
complaisance of a Chinese nobleman. Not only had they not investi
gated the case, but, as far as I can make out, they had not even heard
what it was, except in the most abstract of summaries. Having gravely
adjusted the bandage over each other’s eyes, they separated with a good
-conscience. For many of them—worthy investigators !—I believe I am
-the first to remove the bandage, and set them blinking at the truth.
From (a) it follows, as the president pointed out en passant in the
course of his Address, that every Theosophist is in future free to
circulate Mahatma messages, but no Theosophist to test their
genuineness.
From (¿) it equally follows that no officer of the society is in
future responsible to it for any misdeed whatever, since such misdeed
cannot well be among his official duties.
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
*
*
*
•
63
•
Perhaps it is not very surprising that the result of the Judicial
Committee, which had been gathered to its task from the ends of the
earth, was received with disgust by the generality of members then met
in London for one of their interminable conventions. A demand was even
heard for a private jury of honour • or, failing that, for publication of
the case for both sides, the course to which one side, as we saw, had
affected to pledge itself. Mr. Judge found himself unable to refuse
his assent to the jury proposal. Again , Mrs. Besant dashed in and
triumphed in the sacred cause of obscurantism. . At the third session
of the convention she announced that she and Mr. Judge had agreed
upon a couple of statements representing their different points of view,
and proposed that the convention should hear these, accept them, and
let the matter drop. These two statements compose the second part
of the pamphlet; and they are at least as bewildering as the first.
“We come to you, our brothers, to tell you what is in our hearts,”
Mrs. Besant read out. Her endeavour to “ tell ” fills four pages. The
following are the sentences which gyrate least round the point:—
I do not charge, and have not charged, Mr. Judge with forgery in the
ordinary sense of the term, but with giving a misleading form to messages
received psychically from the Master in various ways. . . . Personally I hold
that this method is illegitimate. . . I believe that Mr. Judge wrote with his own
hand, consciously or automatically I do not know, in the script adopted as that
of the Master, messages which he received from the Master, or from
chelas j and I know that in my own case I believed that the messages he
gave me in the well-known script were messages directly precipitated or
directly written by the Master.
When I publicly said that I had
received, after H. P. Blavatsky’s death, letters in the writing that H. P.
Blavatsky had been accused of forging, I referred to letters given to me
by Mr. Judge, and as they were in the well-known script I never dreamt of
challenging their source. I know now that they were not written or preci
pitated by the Master, and that they were done by Mr. Judge ; but I also
believe that the gist of these messages was psychically received, and that
Mr. Judge’s error lay in giving them to mein a script written by himself and
not saying so. . . . Having been myself mistaken, I in turn misled the
public.
The rest of Mrs. Besant’s statement is easily summarised. Part is
devoted to minimising the importance of the question whether Mr.
�64
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
Judge wrote? or the Mahatma precipitated, the letters, by remarking
that after all it did not matter so very much, as Mahatmas sometimes
¡communicate (like spiritualist “ controls ”) by allowing ordinary people
to write for them. “ It is important,” quoth Mrs. Besant, • naively,.
“ that the small part generally played by Masters in these phenomena
should -be understood ”—a remark with which the present writer
quite agrees, and a main object of the present narrative. But
|n the sense in which Mrs. Besant meant it, it was not very relevant to an
inquiry entirely dealing with letters passed off as having been precipi
tated, and precipitated without Mr. Judge’s knowledge, by the Mahatma
himself.
Beyond this, Mrs. Besant’s statement consists about equally
of blame directed at the untheosophical “vindictiveness” of Mr. Judge’s
accusers in pressing an inquiry “ painful ” to Mr. Judge, and of lauda
tory tributes to the character and Theosophical activity of Mr. Judge
himself.
Down Mrs. Besant sat, and up rose Mr. Judge, and read his state
ment. It contained the following sentences :—
I repeat my denial of the said rumoured charges of forging the said
names and handwritings of the Mahatmas, or of misusing the same. . . .
I admit that I have received and delivered messages from the
Mahatmas . . . they were obtained through me, but as to how
they were obtained or produced I cannot state. . . . My own
methods may disagree from the views of others. ... I willingly say
that which I never denied, that I am a human being, full of error, liable to
mistake, not infallible, but just the same as any other human being like to
myself, or of the class of human beings to which I belong. And I freely,
fully, and sincerely forgive anyone who may be thought to have injured or
tried to injure me.
Now, so far as these sentences were an answer at all to such charges
as Mrs. Besant’s statement had allowed itself to convey, they were cer
tainly a flat contradiction. But that point was naturally overlooked by
eyes moist from the affecting “ forgiveness ” of Mr. Judge’s peroration,
and his very handsome, if somewhat tautologousjy expressed, admis
sion that he was only a “ human being.” Without a word more, nemine
contradicente^ it was
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
65
Resolved : that this meeting accepts with pleasure the adjustment arrived
at by Annie Besant and William Q. Judge as a final settlement of matters
pending hitherto between them as prosecutor and defendant, with a hope
that it may be thus buried and forgotten, and—
Resolved : that we will join hands with them to further the cause of
genuine brotherhood in which we all believe.
These resolutions were proposed by the Mr. Keightley (M.A.
Cant.) whose name has occurred so often in our story among the bam
boozled ones, and seconded by Dr. Buck, one of the nominees from
Mr. Judge's section to the abortive committee.
And there ends the Pamphlet—and the “ Enquiry.” It has since
appeared that the ‘‘joining of hands ” between Mrs. Besant and Mr.
Tudge was for footlight purposes only ; for no sooner was the
curtain rung down than the two joint Outer Heads found they could
no longer work together, and settled the matter by splitting
the Esoteric section into independent dominions, Mr. Judge taking
America, and Mrs. Besant Europe—to which she has since added
India.
The result is one on which Mr. William Q. Judge must be con
gratulated. He retains all his offices as head of his lodge, of his
section, and of the American Esoteric section ; retains his vice
presidency of the whole society ; retains the status of heir-presumptive,
at least, to the presidency ; retains, also, I suppose, either he or his
Mahatma, the brass “ flap-doodle,” to say nothing of the Blavatsky
relic, with full freedom to continue using the same as heretofore.
In a word, the Theosophical Society has chosen to stand or fall
with its vice-president.
*****
Theosophy is » -religion as well as a philosophy, and the T.S.
masquerades as in some sort a Church. Imagine the situation, then,
in any other religious denomination. Suppose that the Archbishop
of Canterbury were to put forth missives which he alleged to have
fluttered down direct from St. Augustine in heaven ; and suppose,
after Convocation had governed the Church for years in conformity with
�66
ÎSIS^VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
directions so received, the Archbishop of York were to declare at a
Church Congress his belief that his esteemed brother, whose services to
the Church were beyond all praise, had written the missives himself, an
expedient “ which I personally hold to be illegitimate,” but into the
details of which he begged the Congress not to pry : suppose, then,
that the Archbishop of Canterbury on his part declared himself, like
Mr. Pickwick, “ much gratified with the candid explanation of his hon.
riend,” that he “ merely considered him a humbug in a Pickwickian
point of view”—supposing all this, can you imagine the Church
Congress rising as one man to “bury” the dispute, and “join bands”
with the embracing disputants ?
■
Probably not.
But then, as Mrs. Besant remarked, the
“ standards of the world ” are “ lower ” than those of the Theosophical
Society—and of the “Pickwick Club.”
Nevertheless, I must ask leave to break in on the harmonious
scene with a few troublesome questions.
�67
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
CHAPTER
XIII.
QUESTIONS AND CHALLENGES.
“ Hath he said anything ? ’’
“He hath, my lord ; but, be you well assured,
No more than he’ll unswear.”—“ Othello.”
“ Next in importance, or perhaps equal in value, to Devotion, is
Truth.”—Circular on “ Occultism and Truth,” signed by H. S. Olcott,
Annie Besant, B. Keightley, &c., July, 1894.
;
In my first chapter I set out certain conclusions. In succeeding
•chapters I have given the facts on which my conclusions were based.
I now assert that the evidence for those facts, be it good or bad, is
•that of the Theosophical leaders themselves, written and signed as the
ease against the Vice-President, and adopted by Mrs. Besant as true. If
it be not true, then Colonel Olcott, Mr. B. Keightley, Mr. W. R. Old, and
the other official witnesses must be guilty of a conspiracy, as I said at
The outset, “even more discreditable to the personnel of the society.” It
is not I who accuse Mr. Judge. It is Mr. Judge and his colleagues
who accuse each other.
The rank-and-file of the Theosophists have
paid their money ; they may now take their choice.
The fact is, before Mrs. Besant got hold of the evidence, at least
one set of complete and duly witnessed copies had been made,
together with facsimiles of the documents. It is these which lately
fell into my hands, under circumstances which left me free to take,
as I do take, the moral and legal responsibility of that publication
which the president first promised and afterwards shirked.
*
*
*
*
*
In regard to Mr. William Q. Judge, vice-president, I do
not feel called on to labour any theory of my own as to
e
2
�68
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
that „ gentleman’s character and conduct.
As the Society for
Psychical Research long ago remarked, the precise line between rogue
and dupe in the Theosophical Society has never been easy to draw.
On any view of Mr. Judge I have at least as much respect lor him as
for his virtuously vacillating superior, whose mind seems to have been
made up for him from one stage to another by whatever party
happened to be at the moment nearest and most peremptory. With
the facts of the preceding narrative before him, the reader can form his
own opinion about both officials.
Equally unable am I to state what Mr. Judge’s own version of Mr.
Judge’s acts may be. I have read and re-read his “statement ” at the
“ Enquiry,” and his circular issued just previously. In these I have
groped—faint, yet pursuing—among the mazes of that Theosophical
verbiage which always seems to be coming to the point; but
for me at least it has never quite got there. Where the denials
are most explicit, the thing denied is vaguest; where admission is most
candid, the thing admitted is least relevant to the issue. Mr. Judge
admits, for instance, that he is a “fallible human being”; he denies
that he has “ forged.” I, for one, should never dream of disputing
either position. The verb, to forge, definitely connotes in English the
imitation of the signature of a person who really exists, and who has
also an existent banking account. The worst I should dream of
imputing to Mr. Judge in this connexion is the imitation of someone
else’s imitation of the feigned signature of somebody who never existed.
Mr. judge must see that between the mere human fallibility
to which he confesses, and the felony of which no one has■accused him, it does not need a sensitive ear to distin
guish whole octaves of intervening notes. Thanks to Mrs. Besant,
he has not yet been obliged to locate himself at any one
point of the gamut. But, for all I know, he may now come forward
and twit his associates with deficient humour for not seeing that the
whole thing was just a rollicking hoax.
Throwing off the
role of an interpreter of Tibet, he may appear as William
Q. Judge, the American Humorist. He might fairly claim that
many have performed under a like title much less divertingly. He
�ISIS VERY MUCH UR VEILED.
69
«light say that the joke was so obvious that it never struck
him his colleagues would take it seriously; that their evident
■determination not to spoil sport was an invitation no joker could
have resisted; and that he only kept it up so long for the
fun of seeing, through a graduated scale of absurdity, how much they
really would stand. Of course, to carry through a big practical joke one
may be excused a few taradiddles, to which the moralist might apply a
Harsher name. No doubt some might question the taste of making a
friend’s funeral the starting-point of even the most innocent mauvatse
fiiaUanterie. But American humour has never spared the cemetery.
*****
From my own position, then, and Mr. Judge’s position, I now pass
to Mrs. Besant’s. This is interesting from its bearing on the curious
psychological puzzle offered by Mrs. Besant’s own mind, to the study
of which she herself continually invites the public. Let us accept
the invitation for a moment.
I take Mrs. Besant’s statement at the so-called “Enquiry,” that she
believed now that Judge wrote with his own hand the missives which
.he had induced her, and she had induced the public, to regard as precip tations from Tibet of the kind which “some people would call
miraculous.”
Apparently Mrs. Besant considers that this avowal sufficed to clear
her honour towards her colleagues and the public whom she had
“ misled.” To me it appears admirably calculated to mislead them
again. Remember, even those whom Mrs. Besant was addressing—
much more the outside public—were ignorant of the facts. Mrs.
.Besant had taken good care of that.
They did not know, as the reader does, the circumstances which
surrounded these various missives : The “ Master Agrees ” missive, the
Telegram missive, the Cabinet missive, the “ Note the Seal,” the
“Judge’s Plan is Right,” the “Judge is the Friend,” the Envelope
Trick, the “ Withold,” the “ Master will Provide,” the Bank-note,
the Inner Group, the “ Grave Danger Olcott,” the “ Judge is not. the
Eorger,” the “Follow Judge and Stick,” and the Poison Threat
�7o
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
missive—as I have severally named them.
Referring to those circumstances, as the reader now knows them,
I ask of what did and does Mrs. Besant mean to convict Mr. Judge ?
If Judge “ wrote with his own hand ” the answers got from' the
Cabinet oracle (May 23, 1891), did he also use sleight-of-hand or
some similar artifice to make her accept the answers as precipitated in
a sealed envelope in a closed drawer ?
If Judge “wrote,” &c., the slip “Judge’s plan is right,” the sudden
appearance of which among Mrs. Besant’s papers made her and him
joint officials on May 27, 1891—did he also place it among those
papers on purpose to be so discovered ?
If Judge “ wrote ” &c., Mrs. Besant’s message of July 12, 1891,
which was across the inside flaps of a closed envelope—did he alsoinsert the writing by the trick described in the chapter which I entitled“ Every Man his Own Mahatma ” ?
If Judge “wrote,” &c., all the various letters, notes, and endorse
ments to which the “ Mahatma’s ” signature and seal were attached,
missives backing Judge’s own views, raising Judge’s own Theosophical
status, and bluffing other “servants” of that “Master,” to whom
he and they cannot allude without capital letters—did he also
“ with his own hand ” take and affix the seal which he has persistently
denied having ever set eyes on ?
If Mrs. Besant did not mean all this, and much more which hangs
by the same logic, thei her Statement grossly calumniated Mr. Judge
to the few who knew the tenor of the case against him.
If she did mean it, then her Statement completely hoodwinked her
audience and the public.
For will anybody assert that this, which has just been outlined, or
anything like it, was the picture naturally called up by Mrs. Besant’s care
fully worded description of “Mr. Judge’s error” as the negative one of
“not mentioning” certain circumstances, her suggestion that personal
opinions might reasonably differ on the “legitimacy ” of his methods,,
her laudatory allusions to his general character and Theosophic services,
her public sanction of a statement on his part which on this theory
�ISIS VERY MUCH UR VEILED.
must have been utterly, misleading, her eager lead in the attempt to
cloak up for ever the Great Mahatma Hoax, and to shield the hoaxer?
But there is another point. Mrs. Besant professes still to cling to
the belief that the Mahatmas had something to do with the letters.
Mr. Judge wrote them, she says, but what he wrote he had first
“ received psychically from the Master.”
(
Faith, fanatic faith, once wedded fast
To some dear falsehood, hugs it to the last.
Nobody can prove that those missives, or, for that matter, these
articles, or Shakespeare’s plays, were not due to the Master’s
“ psychical ” authorship. Mr. Judge and Mrs. Besant are both quite
free to say so. But again I must point out to Mrs. Besant the logical
inferences from her position. In the attempt to hold on to one spar
in the general wreck, she just says enough to inculpate the Mahatma,
and not enough to exculpate Mr. Judge.
For, to apply theory once more to concrete fact: Does Mrs. Besant'
attribute to the Mahatma the preposterous insinuations against Colonel
Olcott ? And does she mean that the Mahatma made these insinua
tions and various direct false statements in order to co-operate with
Mr. Judge in shielding from discovery a prolonged use of a bogus
imitation of the Mahatma’s own seal and signature ?
'
■
In this case, we are entitled to challenge Mrs. Besant to say whether
she herself now believes that the insinuations against Colonel Olcott
were justified. If yes, then I can only leave her to settle that matter
with the Colonel. If no, then what becomes of the supernal wisdom,
and lofty character of “Those Who to some of us are most sacred ”?
Must it not be confessed that They have made uncommon fools of
Themselves ?—not to give a stronger name to the extremely shady
methods of which Tibetan diplomacy is thus found guilty.
The public will await satisfactory answers to these questions. It
will not, I hope, for a moment suspect Mrs. Besant of conscious
fraud, or of sord’d motives.
I most certainly do not. With some
of-the lesser fry, who would be bankrupt in every sense if
Theosophy failed them, the consideration of pleasant board and'
�72
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
lodging at other people’s expense may be a governing one. With
Mrs. .Besant, who brings far more to the organisation in the shape of
gate-money, no doubt, than she ever condescends to accept from it, the
motives are subtler. Had she boldly cut herself free from the rottenness
at the core of the rheosophic movement as soon as it was shown to
her, she might have saved her reputation for straightforwardness, if not
for intelligence.
In choosing instead the equivocal policy of hushing
up a scandal at all costs, she doubtless convinced herself that she was
acting only for the ends of edification and the good of her church.
That is the old, old story of priestcraft, and Mrs. Besant has been
playing the high priestess now for three years. But were there not also
some more personal motives at work ? There is one thing which even
the most candid hate to confess—and that is, that they have
been thoroughly bamboozled.
It does not improve matters
when they have themselves helped in their own bamboozlement.
To confess how recklessly inaccurate were her statements about “the
Same handwriting,” the “semi-miraculous precipitation,” the absolute
assurance of her own senses, and so forth; to let the public see
for itself the childish twaddle which she accepted, and helped to force
upon others, as profound and oracu’ar : all this would have been a sad
come-down from the Delphic tripod. I do not wonder the poor lady
shrank from it. I do wonder that Mrs. Besant cared to evade it at the
expense of a sort of confidence-trick. To this has come the woman
whom we once thought, whatever her other faults, at least fearless and
open—the woman whose epitaph, so she tells us, is to be—
She Sought To Follow Truth!
Lastly, a few words to the rank-and-file of the Theosophical
Society, a large proportion of whom are now gathering open-mouthed
at. Adyar. In Madame Blavatsky few of the better-informed of
the flock nowadays affect to believe—except in public. They cling to
her gifts, perhaps ; they have thrown over her morals.
For fresh
evidence has been coming to light, ever since that strange woman died,
as to the tricks to which she condescended, and encouraged her chelas
to condescend; and poor Colonel Olcott, though he continues to work
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
73
the old gold-mine in print, has been driven even there, to
enunciate the theory that Madame Blavatsky herself was really killed
at the battle of Mentana, and her body thereafter occupied by seven
distinct spirits who, of course, are not responsible for contradicting
each other. Til! May, 1891, Madame was the principal witness to
the objective existence and attributes o Mahatmas. Since that date,
the principal witness is William Q. Judge. Soon the faithful at Adj ar
will be filing into the Occult Room to gaze through peep-holes at
the two August Portraits, illuminated and set off by all the artifices
associated here with exhibitions by M. Jan van Beers. Will they dare,
any of them, to ask their officials plainly what evidence they can now
offer that either of the subjects of those fancy portraits ever existed ?
And if on this and other questions suggested by these chapters,
Mrs. Besant, President Olcott, and Vice-President Judge do not
succeed in satisfying their followers------ what next? No doubt
each member of the trinity will sit secure in his or her autocracy
in his or her own continent, owning there, as I understand, the official
organ and the publishing plant which the society as a whole
has built up into prosperity. Yet something, surely, may be done by
these who do not care to remain unwilling parties to the Great
Mahatma Hoax, to recover their own self-respect, if not to save the
Theosophical Society.
It is or them to decide whether the society, on its non-fraudulent
side, is worth saving. It may be a kind of university extension
for the popularising of Eastern philosophies.
Or it may be, as
some rather think, a mere smattering of catch-words out of cribs
for the use of Mutual Mystification clubs, tending to a certain
indigestion in the mental processes and a flatulent style of
English composition. In either case there is no reason why
the organisation should revolve about a vortex of tomfoolery and
legerdemain into which honest members are apt to be sucked before
they realise its true nature.
�74
ASTS
VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
PART
“THE
VOICE
LETTERS
OF
II.
THE
SILENCE.”
ON VARIOUS SIDES
THEOSOPHISTS.
FROM
:
■ Thè foregoing chapters appeared in the Westminster Gazette, of
October 29th, and nine succeeding issues. They attracted widenotice and comment, and were the subject of allusion in a large parti
of the London and provincial press. In accordance with their usual,
custom, the official Theosophists in England are said to have cabled
to their leaders abroad to know, what line they should take ; but, if ;
so, they do not appear to have got any clear answer.
A mass of correspondence was addressed to the WestminsterGazette, and to the author of the articles, some of it from officials,
most of it from private members ; some admitting that “ much is,
and all may be true,” others denying everything—in general terms ;
some throwing over the Vice-President, others lauding him as a ’
model of Theosophic rectitude; some rejoicing (“ in confidence”)'
at the “ cleaning-out of this Augean stable of trickery,” others-,
declaring that, proved or disproved, the charges do not matter a pin. '
In regard to the repeated accusations that the assailant of the
society “ waited ” till its three Theosophic chiefs were at a distance
before challenging them on their “Enquiry,” it was pointed out
that they gave nobody any chance to wait, the official Report of the'
Enquiry being sent round almost on the very day that Mrs. Besant
sailed for Australia.
The following is a representative selection from the letters :—
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
75
I.—LETTERS FROM OFFICIALS.
FROM THE EUROPEAN SECRETARY: “DESERVING OP' NO
ANSWER.”
Sir—I have forwarded the copies of your paper containing the series
of articles entitled “Isis Very Much Unveiled” to my friends Colonel
Olcott, Mrs. Besant, and Mr. Judge, who are respectively at their posts and
carrying out their engagements in India, Australia, and the United States
of America.
The mass of insinuations and misrepresentations with which these articles
abound is deserving of no answer.
I enclose you a copy of the Enquiry held in July last, to which the full
statements of Mrs. Besant and Mr. Judge are appended. This was months
ago issued to every member of the Theosophical Society and published in
full in our magazines. You can thus allow your readers to form their own
opinion, instead of relying on the insinuations of your contributor, if you
choose to do so.
The writer of the articles has several times made reference to a private
body of students, and endeavoured to involve it in his attack. The infoimant
of your contributor knows that he can with impunity make any allegation he
likes against that body, and that, although it is in a position to give, and has
already given to its own members, a denial to his allegations with regard to
its council, it must, nevertheless, remain silent in public because of obliga
tions of honour.
-- For the rest, of the truth or falsity of the most serious allegations I am
without any knowledge, and do not propose to enter the arena of mere
opinion.
But of this I am confident—that my friends Colonel Olcott, Mrs. Besant,
and Mr. Judge, together with the best part of the Theosophical Society, are
not only ready and glad to face any obloquy in upholding their individual
ideals, but also that they are also willing to sacrifice everything for the cause
they hold so dear, except the privilege of working heart and soul for its final
triumph.—I am, Sir, faithfully yours,
q r g, J4EAD.
-19, Avenue-road, Regent’s Park, N.W.
[The pamphlet forwarded by Mr. Mead is the so-called “ Enquiry into
Certain Charges,” which was the starting-point of our articles, and which
was very lully dealt with in the last two of the series.—Ed. W. G.]
�76
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
FROM THE VICE-PRESIDENT’S REPRESENTATIVES: “ WE
COULD AN IF WE WOULD.”
You appear to have expected an immediate reply to the series
of articles entitled “Isis Very Much Unveiled.” This expectation is
astonishing in view of the fact that, while the three persons mainly
attacked by you were together in London for some weeks this summer,
you waited until Mrs. Annie Besant and Colonel Olcott are now respec
tively in Australia and India, and Mr. W. Q. Judge is on a lecturing tour in
the United States, as your informant knows. His time for attack is well
chosen, but no just measure of surprise can be felt, either that their replies
—should they care to make any—are delayed, or that we should have
intended originally to await the close of your series before making our present
brief remarks.
Your informant holds the position held among Freemasons by a brother
who has broken his Masonic pledge. Those who refuse to enter further
into this subject follow the traditions of all private societies in like
circumstance. Englishmen will take at its proper valuation all informa
tion on whatever subject from such a source. We beg to take
distinct issue with you on the point of the minor importance of sources of
information. Our whole legal system is based upon the contrary fact.
Character of witnesses has primary weight with all civilised juries.
The Theosophical Society has no concern with the beliefs of its members,
nor with questions of Thaumaturgy. The endeavour to spreal a contrary
belief, to confuse the issue by slanders, or attacks against individual mem
bers, to belittle and misrepresent the objects and work of the society, must
alike fail in the face of general disproof. The society pursues its way
unaffected by all such attempts.
The Committee of Investigation appointed to consider the charges made
against Mr. Judge threw out the indictment on the ground that the constitu
tion of the Theosophical Society rendered illegal all charges involving questions
ofcreed or belief. Mr. Judge came from the United States in readiness fortheir
investigation, and his defence had to be abandoned for the preservation of the
freedom of our platform. We do not, therefore, propose to bring the case
to “ trial by newspaper.” As representatives respectively of the American
Section of the T.S. and of the general secretary of that Section on the
Committeeof Investigation, we are aware of the rebuttal evidence held in readi
ness by Mr. Judge. He holds affidavits from persons of unblemished repu
tation disproving a number of the charges made then and now by you, of
which evidence detail is for the present reserved for the reasons above given
We need not further emphasise the danger of conclusions formed from
“plaintiffs evidence ” only.
�ISIS VERY liven UNVEILED.
17
In conclusion, we beg to state our long acquaintance with, and our con
fidence in the integrity and standing of, Mr. Judge, a confidence shared, to our
personal knowledge, to the fullest extent by the American Section of the T.S.,
as the reports of its last Convention prove. The American is the largest and
the most active of our three Sections, one which not only carries on an enormous
work, but which also assists the other two Sections. It is in it that Mr. Judge s
long labour and personal sacrifices have won for him the respect of the ccmmunity. —Yours very truly,
30, Linden-gardens, Bayswater, W.,
Archibald Keightley.
November 6.
James M. Pryse.
Editorial Note appended in
Gazette.
In regard to Dr. Keightley’s remarks on “ the character of
the witnesses,” from which, in view of the law of libel, we have
had to omit one or two phrases, it is only fair to state that
this letter was received before it had been made clear in the articles that
the chief witnesses were, in fact, not Mr. Old, who has resigned office,
but the President and Dr. Keightley’s brother, who retain it
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
7'8
ANOTHER
AVENUE ROAD OFFICIAL: “VOLUMINOUS
LITERATURE” v. HARD FACTS.
Sir,—Now that you have had the only answer it is poSsi Die lor the’
present to make in connexion with that part of your articles which professes
to disclose the affairs of a secret body, I am at liberty to make some
remarks on that part of them which deals with the public affairs of the/Theosophical Society, if you will grant me the opportunity of reply which, as a
member of an attacked society, I have the right to. demand.
In spite of all implications and assertions to the contrary, I must
emphatically assert it as my opinion that the majority of members of the
society do not join on account of phenomena; and I regard
any attempt to prove the contrary as a conscious or uncon
scious misrepresentation of the actual state of affairs.
A large
mass of the public know well by this time that the chief activity
of the society consists in making known and advocating a certain system
of philosophy, and that appeals are made to the judgment and intel
lectual sense of the people as to whether they shall acceptor reject it. I donot
know whether your intelligent readers will consider themselves flattered when
they read your contributor’s notion of the kind of procedure that is necessary to
captivate them ; but I am inclined to think that most of them must have
common-sense enough to prefer judging a philosophy by its own merits to
accepting or rejecting it according to the evidence for and against phenomena
wrought in connexion with it. However, if there be any who, indifferent to
all questions of ethical and philosophical truth, choose their faith according
to its thaumaturgic properties alone, the society will not be sorry to lose
them, for such weak natures are a source of weakness to every body in which
they enrol themselves.
While declaring here my own belief in the integrity and sincerity of the
persons attacked in your articles, and regretting my inability to communi
cate all of that faith to others, I maintain, Sir, that Theosophy will not
stand or fall by any personal scandals, whether true or false, and that
the Theosophical Society will not cease to exist in Europe so long as there
are even a few who believe as I do.
�.ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
79
Your contributor has sought to convey the impression that the Theoso"phists, or at all events those who reside at the various headquarters,
live in an atmosphere of constant thaumaturgy and intrigue ; ever in expec
tation of some new wonder, ever ready to alter their deepest convictions at
a moment’s notice in accordance with some enigmatical message or
"some trumpery sign. I call upon those who know the society, are
habitues at its meetings, or have lived at headquarters, to say whether
there is a grain of truth in this, or whether, on the contrary, we are a body
of earnest students, living a prosaic life, and exhausting our energies in
the endeavour to place before others the truths we have found so helpful
to ourselves.
Your contributor makes much of his contention that the adepts were
invented by Madame Blavatsky. What does he expect to gain by this ? If he
can succeed in discrediting Madame Blavatsky in the eyes of a few persons,
he cannot disprove the existence of adepts for them unless he is also
prepared to discredit every one of the other sources of information from
which the evidence for the existence of such exalted men is drawn. Madame
Blavatsky has reminded the world of the reality of those beings in which the
more enlightened of its denizens have always believed.
Of the few
who may have accepted the belief on her testimony alone I ‘would say,
/better they had taken the trouble to substantiate it from other sources.
. Whether Madame Blavatsky invented the adepts or not, at all events I here
: and now advance the theory, and refer for my evidence to the Theosophical
, literature on the subject, which is plentiful.
r
Let our critics, a:ter reading it, come forward and publicly refute us.
We await their onslaught with pleasure. Many points I am obliged to leave
untouched on account of the length my letter would otherwise assume ; but
I must just note the absolute futility of the statement that “Max Muller
has edited the only series of English translations of the Sacred Books of
the East with which I am acquainted,” and the complete falsity of the
statement that “there is no reason to believe that any member of the society
in Europe could pass an examination in any Oriental language whatever.”
'„Let these serve as samples of the quality of the rest of the attack.
In conclusion, sir, I would call your readers’ attention to the fantastically
absurd position of an opponent who hopes to discredit, by his
�8o
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
so-called “exposure” of a certain group of manifestations, the whole
sacred science of true magic. I maintain that such a science as
magic (in its true sense) exists, that it teaches the mysteries of nature
and of man, that the voice of the ages endorses it, and that it is
worthy of study to-day. I am prepared to support these contentions
publicly if called upon, and can meanwhile refer your readers to the
voluminous literature of the subject.—Yours truly,
HENRY T. EDGE.
19, Avenue-road, Regent’s Park, London, N.W., November 7.
II.—LETTERS FROM PROMINENT
THEOSOPHISTS.
FROM MR. HERBERT BURROWS :
A REPLY WE MUST
HAVE, OR I LEAVE THE SOCIETY.”
“ What do you think of The Westminster Gazette articles ? What
are the Theosophical Society and what are its members going to de
about them ? ” This is the question which is asked me on all hands.
I recognise that not only my own personal friends but the public
generally have a right to ask this question, and to expect an answer,
and I have asked the permission of the Editor to give the answer from
my own point of view, without in the smallest degree pledging anyone
else. Without the smallest tinge of egotism, I may say that,
next to Mrs. Besant, I am perhaps better known to the public
generally than any other English member of the Theosophical Society.
I have tried to bring a good many people into the fold of the faith, I
know intimately the currents of thought inside the society, and while
no one is responsible for the opinions I express, I believe that they
represent the feelings of a large number of members.
The Old. “Exposure” and. the New.
When I read Mr. Garrett’s opening chapters, I said to myself,
“ Chestnuts ! ” We had heard it so often before. All the while Mr.
Garrett was writing about the “S.P.R.” he was probably asking himself,
How is it that this business did not kill the Theosophical Society ?
The answer is, Because it was not conclusive.
When Mrs. Besant
and I joined the society, apart from each other, I joining a few
�MRS. ANNIE BESANT,
(From a photograph by Messrs. Elliott & Fry, Baker-street, W.)
��ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
days before her, Madame Blavatsky said to both of us, “ You had
better read what there is against me,” and referred us to the Psychical
Report. We read it separately, analysed it, and joined. I brought to
it my Civil Service training, what business faculties I had, and a fair
knowledge of the laws of evidence.
I am a sceptic by nature,
and I was then a materialist, and the honest conclusion that
I came to was that the case for the prosecution was far too
weak to warrant a conviction. That opinion I still hold. If I thought
differently I should be outside the Theosophical Society instead of in
it. I suppose that nine out of ten people who talk glibly about
the report have never seen even the covers of it.
But I am bound to say that as Mr. Garrett went on with thif.
newer case the situation altered. The details are too precise, and
supported by too much evidence, for me honestly to escape from the
conclusion that, if the facts and documents are correctly set forth, a
prima facie case has been established against Mr. Judge.
“If Mp. Judge declines to answer.”
Some facts in the series of articles and many of the inferences are
wrong, as I shall have occasion to show; but enough is made clear to
imperatively demand an answer. The charge here is, of course, of no
offence known to the law; but were it otherwise, many men have
been found guilty on charges which were supported by less evidence?
than these.
_ I am quite aware rhat a goodly number of my fellow Theosophists will blame me exceedingly for saying this, especially some of
our younger members, whose moral sense seems somehow or other to
have become confused over this matter. Let me put myself quite straight
with them. My mind is perfectly open on the subject.
I have no
opinion yet one way or the other as to Mr. Judge’s conduct,
for I have not heard his defence.
For aught I know he may
have a crushing, triumphant reply, and Mr. Garrett and Mr. Old
(and with them Mirs. Besant 1) may all have to go down on their knees
to , Mr. Judge.
But that reply we must have, and as a member
of the Theosophical Society, whose motto is, “ There is no religion
F
�82
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
higher than Truth,” ,and who has appealed to the :public to join it.
because I believed that it was founded on truth, and that its chief
officials and leaders were upright, honourable people, I mean to use
every legitimate effort to get it.
If Mr. Judge declines to.
give it, if he refuses to come out into the open fully and
squarely, or if his reply does not meet the case, then sadly and
reluctantly I shall have to leave the Theosophical Society, for it will be
impossible any longer to remain in an organisation whose vice-president
is in such a position.
An Appeal to all Honest Theosophists.
Now it depends on the members of the society as to whether Mr.
Judge’s reply shall be forthcoming. They can make such strong repre
sentations to him as will be impossible for him to ignore, and I hold
that it is their duty to do so. Every member of the society has an
indefeasible right to know what manner of man their vice-president
is, and it ought to be made perfectly clear that the morality
of the organisation is at least as high as that of the best
commercial morality, and is not based on Jabez - Balfourism.
If there is to be any talk, as there is already among some members, of
“letting by-gones be by-gones—saving the situation—ignoring the
attack for the sake of Theosophy, safeguarding occultism,” &c., then
self-respecting members will have to protest strongly, and, if necessary,
clear out. All such talk comes from mental ostriches, and in this
matter ostrich-tactics won’t work.
It is not a question of
Mr. Judge, or of occultism, or the Theosophical Society, but
what is above and beyond all these, Truth, on which Theosophy itself
is based, as I firmly believe. If there is no religion higher than truth
Tien truth must be had at all hazards. For the truth we shall have tG
wait, perhaps, some months. Till we get it, minds should be perfectly
open and unbiassed. Only three people can give the truth—Mr. Judge,
Mrs. Besant, and Colonel Olcott. As far as lies in my power I mean
to see that the truth is forthcoming.
The Judicial Committee of Inquiry.
Over this Mr. Garrett has floundered somewhat.
I was a
member of it, and know the facts. When Mr. Garrett says in his
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
83
first article that “ a few people are aware . . . that there was recently a
Theosophic meeting ac which Mrs. Besant confessed to her friends that
there had been something wrong with the ‘ communications,’ ” and
that she persuaded those assembled generally to hush the matter up,
he does not know his case.
This is what really happened.
Alter Mr. Old had been some time in India he came to the
conclusion that certain charges against Mr. Judge, which up to
then had been vaguely floating about, were true, and he said
so.
In England we disbelieved them, for we had no real
evidence, but when Mrs. Besant reached India, and examined the
evidence, she agreed with Mr. Old. She formally adopted and formu
lated the charges, and the fact that she had done so immediately
became known all over the world. There was no hole-and-corner work
about it. An official investigation committee met, but found itself blocked
by the constitutional difficulties with which your readers are now familiar.
Mrs. Besant and the Deadlock.
Then I proposed that we should resolve ourselves into a voluntary jury
of honour. Mr. Judge did not agree to this, and so there was a dead
lock. The evidence had not been heard, although Mrs. Besant was
ready with it, for the inquiry had not been made, neither had we heard
Mr. Judge’s defence. The next stage in the proceedings was the reading,
to a very full meeting of members from all parts of the world_ for it was our annual convention—of the statements by Mrs. Besant and
Mr. Judge, to which Mr. Garrett has so often referred.
In her state
ment Mrs. Besant said : “The vital charge is that Mr. Judge has issued
letters and messages in the script recognisable as that adopted by a
Master with whom H.P.B. was closely connected, and that these lettersand
messages were neither written nor precipitated directly by the Master in
whose writing they appear.” That is pretty definite and precise. These
two statements by the accuser and the accused, together with all the
proceedings of the committee, were published in Lucifer on
August 15, and they were reprinted in a pamphlet which was
sent to every member of the society, and I also know
F2
�84
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
that the day before she sailed for Australia Mrs. Besant
made arrangements for that pamphlet to be sent to all the
principal papers of the United Kingdom. I have said all this at
length in order to dispel the idea that Mrs. Besant wished to bam
boozle the society or hush up charges of fraud. I know that it is
asked why she did not publish the whole of the evidence. If the
official Enquiry had been proceeded with the evidence would have
been published with its other proceedings.
But Mrs. Besant
felt, rightly or wrongly, that it would be unfair of her to publish it
without the defence, and this there were no means of getting.
The Unsatisfactory Position of the Society.
But now see the unsatisfactory position of the society. The most
serious charge possible had been made by its chief member against
its second official, one of its founders, the tried and trusty friend of
Madame Blavatsky. The charges were still hanging over his head, his
members in America thoroughly disbelieved them, the members in India
as thoroughly believed them, and we in Europe did not know what to
think. They had been neither proved nor disproved. Colonel Olcott
was going back to India, Mr. Judge flitted back to America, and Mrs.
Besant rushed off to Australia to fulfil lecturing engagements made a year
previously, and so far as regards the society generally Mahomet’s
coffin was not in it for “ floating.” Those of us who really took the
thing to heart held our hands. We fully recognised the gravity of the
whole matter, but we determined to wait till Mrs. Besant’s return
before we moved, for without the evidence we were powerless. But
we reckoned without our Westminster 1
In concluding this article, I say frankly that The Westminster
has really, although quite unconsciously, done Mr. Judge a good turn.
I do not for a moment flatter myself that Mr. Garrett wishes
any good to Theosophy ! The tone of his articles precludes that
idea. But his attack on Mr. Judge puts the latter in this
position, that if he chooses he can defend himself without any fear
whatever of pledging the Theosophical Society to one jot or tittle of
dogma with regard to Mahatmas. He is attacked as a man, and as a
man I sincerely hope that he will manfully and satisfactorily reply.
Herbert Burrows.
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
FROM
MR.
W.
R. OLD, EX-OFFICIAL: “A
GRIP OF THE FACTS.”
85
THOROUGH
Sir,—As my name has been publicly mentioned by Mr. Mead,
general secretary of the European T.S., in connexion with the series of
articles “Isis Very Much Unveiled,” I think it advisable to state my own
position and attitude in the matter.
The writer of those articles has named me, quite correctly, as having
taken the first step in forcing an inquiry into the case against
Mr. Judge.
For this act of mine, I was suspended from my
membership in the Esoteric Section, under the authority of the
joint signatures of William Q. Judge and Annie Besant, Outer
Heads of the E.S.T., and my name was dishonourably mentioned
before the members of the E.S., among whom I numbered many an old
colleague and friend. The mandate somehow found its way into the public
Press. However, there was one advantage. After her official action in
suspending me from membership Mrs. Besant was, of course, bound to hear
my justification. This happened at Adyar in the winter of 1893.
Mrs.
Besant s first remark to me after reading the case and examining the
documents was, “You were perfectly justified by the facts before you.”
THE HEAD OFFICIALS PLEDGED TO PUBLISH THE FACTS.
In the presence of the president-founder Colonel Olcott, Mrs. Besant,
Countess Wachtmeister, Mr. E. T. Sturdy, together with Mr. Edge and
myself, it was decided that the task of officially bringing the charges should
devolve upon Mrs. Besant, and that the whole of the evidence should be
published. Consequently, the documents were handed over to Mrs. Besant
for the purpose of drawing up her charges, and the president sent an
official letter—or, as Colonel Olcott now claims, a “ private letter ” in
official form—dated at Agra, February 12, 1894, to Mr. Judge as
vice-president, in which he said (I re-quote from a circular issued by Mr.
Judge, March 15, 1894):—“ I place before you the following options :—
1. To retire from all offices held by you in the T.S., and leave me to
make a merely general public explanation ; or,
2. To have a Judicial Committee convened .... and make public the
whole ot the proceedings in detail.
�86
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
In either alternative, you will observe, a public explanation is found
necessary : in the one case, general ; in the other, to be full and covering
all the details.”
It was the second alternative which was adopted, with the abortive and
disingenuous result already known. But what of the “ full publication of all
the details ” ? What of us Theosophists who had brought these charges
against Mr. Judge? Were we not left in the position of persons who had
brought charges without proving them ? The position was one which I
felt to be intolerable. Mrs. Besant had the full evidence in her hands by
which to justify all the charges she had engaged to bring against Mr. Judge,
but for some reason best known to herself involved the whole society in countenancinga systematic attempt to bolsterup a delusionjoy concealmentof facts.
Mrs. Besant was also in honour bound to publish the facts, to all members
of the society at least, since they were of a nature to vitally affect the beliefs
of Theosophists the world over. She was, in short, bound to give them the
same publicity as her former professions of occult intercourse obtained.
“MORALLY BOUND TO GIVE PUBLICITY TO THE TRUTH.”
The T.S. is an organised body with a wide system of propaganda, and
has taken the public into its confidence in cases where its special claims
appear to have been supported by facts, and while the public are invited to
join the society it is only right and honest that they should know what of
those claims are true and what of those “ facts ” have stood the test of
inquiry. This responsibility cannot be avoided, and as I have personally
been instrumental in the inquiry into these claims and facts, I am
morally bound to give what publicity I can to the truth when arrived at
To rectify what I believed to be a fatal policy on the part of those concerned
with the charges against Mr. Judge, I resigned from all offices held by me
in the T.S., and left myself free to speak openly of the matter whenever
occasion presented itself. I do not believe that a system of truth can be raised
from a fabric of fraud. In the course of my travels I met with my friend
Mr. Garrett, to whom, upon inquiry, I gave the reasons of my resignation
from official connexion with the society. He asked my permission to
publish the facts. My reply was that although I could not unsay what I
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
87
had said, I had not intended such publication as he contemplated, and
doubted whether the case could be put forth with sufficient clearness - and
fairness by a “ Philistine.” I soon found, however, that he had a thorough
grip of the facts ; and on his representation, the truth of which I had to
admit, that the society had closed the inquiry, and would not open its
journals to a lull discussion of the evidence, I let him take his own course.
Certain persons, who seem unable to conceive that a man may act on
principle and without interested motives, have suggested that I was moved
by some petty personal grudge, or even by some pecuniary inducement. I
repudiate both these insinuations as lies. My independent action in this
matter has involved certain pecuniary sacrifices ; I have in no way used it,
and should scorn to use it, for pecuniary gain.
MR. JUDGE
AND
MRS.
BESANT.
It will, therefore, be clear to all members of the T.S. and the public gene
rally that I am responsible for the facts occurring in Mr. Garrett’s articles
only so far as they apply to the charges against Mr. Judge, and for these I have
documentary evidence produced under a legal hand, and duly witnessed.
With Mr. Garrett’s method of presenting the facts I am by no means in
sympathy. I do not lose sight of the fact that, however mistaken or misled
many of the Theosophical Society may be, as regards the traditional
“ Mahatmas ” and their supposed “ communications,” they are nevertheless
as sincere in their beliefs as many of their more orthodox fellows, and have
as much right to respectful consideration. I regret particularly that Mrs.
Besant should have been placed in this awkward public position by the
present exposure. Her intention I believe to have been perfectly honest,.
but I think she made a fatal mistake in avoiding the publication of the full
fscts, and in allowing the misconception to endure concerning her own
and Mr. Judge’s connexion with the Mahatmas.
MME.
BLAVATSKY
AND
THE
MAHATMAS.
Of Madame Blavatsky I speak as I knew her. At the time I made her
acquaintance she had forsworn all “phenomenalism,” so that I never saw
any occult phenomena at any time. I believe that./or her the Mahatmas
existed, and I believe she thought them to be embodied personalities.
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
Colonel Olcott has another theory, and others have their own. Personally,
I believe in the extensibility of ¿araan faculty, and in the existence- of an
order of intelligences higher than, our own, but I do not require that they are
■embodied or terrestrial in any set se of the word. Finally, I have been through
the Theosophical Society vrith my eyes open, and for more than five years have
been, officially and unofficially, as fully “ in the Theosophical Society ” as
one can well be ; and while I am certain that many are fully convinced of the
truth of their own beliefs in these matters, I am also fully assured that a
large number are in the position of persons self-deceived, who have
unfortunately committed themselves too far to review their position without
almost disastrous consequences to themselves and others. But that of which
1 have the fullest conviction and the greatest amount of presentable proof
is the fact that no such thing as evidence of the existence (in an ordinary
sense) of the Mahatmas, or of their connexion with the T.S. as a body or
with its members individually, is obtainable by a person pursuing ordinary
methods of investigation.
For those who are willing to found their beliefs upon the mere state
ment of another, without question of possible interestedness on the one
hand, or self-deception on the other, the position isot course otherwise. For
such persons proofs have no value whatever, what they are pleased to call
their “ beliefs ” and their “ knowledge ” being determined or determinable
from the moment they sign away their independence of judgment and
freedom of thought.—Yours sincerely,
Walter R. Old.
P.S.—One misstatement of fact appears in your issue of November 3.
What Mr. Garrett refers to as “ Madame Blavatsky’s Rosicrucian signet
ring ” was not a ring, but a jewel, used as a pendant. Also, the “ dark
gentleman” who delivered the two £10 notes to Mr. Judge made his call
(so we were told) in the early afternoon, not in “ the evening ” as stated
in Mr. Garrett’s text. I am bound to add that, whatever may be my
annoyance and regret at the tone of the articles and of some of the inferences,
as regards that part of the evidence which is known to myself, I have
noticed so far no other substantial error offact.
[These slight corrections have been made in this reprint.—F. E. G.J
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
FROM
MR.
A.
P.
SINNETT: “OCCULTISTS
TELL FIBS.”
89
MAY
NOT
Sir,—The circular bearing this title—referred to in your leading
columns yesterday—was issued last July, and directly affects some
questions you have lately been discussing. Under the circumstances, I
hope you will kindly consent to give it fuller publicity. It was addressed
to students of Occultism, and ran as follows :—
The inevitable mystery which surrounds Occultism and the Occultist has given
rise in the minds of many to a strange confusion between the duty of silence
and the error of untruthfulness. «''There are many things that the Occultist
may not divulge; but equally binding is the law that he may never speak
untruth. And this obligation to Truth is not confined to speech ; he may
never think untruth, nor act untruth. A spurious Occultism dallies with truth and false
hood, and argues that deception on the illusory physical plane is consistent with purity
on the loftier planes on which the Occultist has his true life; it speaks con
temptuously of “mere worldly morality”—a contempt that might be justified if
it raised a higher standard, but which is out of place when the phrase is used
to condone acts which the “ mere worldly morality ” would disdain to
practise. The doctrine that the end justifies the means has proved in the past
fruitful of all evil; no means that are impure can bring about an end that is good,
else were the Good Law a dream and Karma a mere delusion. From these errors
.flows an influence mischievous to the whole Theosophical Society, undermining the
stern and rigid morality necessary as a foundation for Occultism of the Right Hand
Path.
•'
Finding that this false view of Occultism is spreading in the Theosophical
Society, we desire to place on record our profound aversion to it, and our
conviction that morality of the loftiest type must be striven after by every
one who would tread in safety the difficult ways of the Occult World. Only by
rigid truthfulness in thought, speech, and act on the planes on which works our waking
consciousness, can the student hope to evolve the intuiton which unerringly discerns
between the true and the false in the supersensuous worlds, which recognises
truth at sight and so preserves him from fatal risks in those at first confusing regions.
To cloud the delicate sense of truth here is to keep it blind there; hence every
teacher of Occultism has laid stress on truthfulness as the most necessary equipment
of the would-be disciple. To quote a weighty utterance of a wise Indian disciple :—
“Next in importance, or perhaps equal in value, to Devotion is Truth. It
is simply impossible to over-estimate the efficacy of Truth in all its phases
�90
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
and bearings in helping the onward evolution of the human soul. We must
love truth, seek truth, and live truth; and thus alone can the Divine
Light which is Truth Sublime be seen by 'the student of Occultism When
there is the slightest leaning towards falsehood in any shape, there is shadow and
ignorance, and their child, pain. This leaning towards falsehood belongs to the lower
personality without doubt. It is here that our interests clash, it is here the struggle for
existence is in full swing, and it is therefore here that cowardice and dishonesty and
fraud find any scope. The ‘ signs and symptoms ’ of the operations of this lower
self can never remain concealed from one who sincerely loves truth and seeks truth. ”•
> To understand oneself, and so escape self-deception, Truth must be practisedthus only can be avoided the dangers of the “ conscious and unconscious deception ”
against which a Master warned his pupils in 1885.
Virtue is the foundation of White Occultism ; the Paramitas, six and ten the
transcendental virtues, must be mastered, and each of the Seven Portals on the’Path
is a virtue, which the Disciple must make his own/ Out of the soil of pure morality
alone can grow the sacred flower which blossoms at length into Arhatship, and those
who aspire to the blooming of the flower must begin by preparing the soil.
H. S. Olcott, A. P. Sinnett, Annie Besant, Bertram Keightley W
Wynn Westcott, E. T. Sturdy, C. W. Leadbeater.
I do not propose to discuss the merits of the case against Mr. Judge,
but we who signed this paper—without prejudging in their personal aspect
accusations which it had then been found impossible to thresh out thoroughly
conceived it desirable to remind all fellow-students of Occultism that no
beneficial results along that path could possibly be attained except by a
course of life which, whatever else it might be, should be strictly in harmony
with the dictates of ordinary morality.
The Theosophical Society has grown in a few years to such
extraordinary proportions, and is so loosely jointed, that it cannot be
correctly thought of as a homogeneous association all parts of which
are equally represented by the officers nominally at its head. But it
ought at this crisis to be generally understood that the many
persons of culture and earnest purpose to whom spiritual progress along
the original lines of Theosophic teaching is the mam object of existence are
guided by evidence concerning the possibilities of their higher evolution
that is of a kind utterly unlike that which you not unreasonably discredit.
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
91
4 great block of such evidence is in our possession concerning not merely
the existence but also the attributes of the great initiates, and to those of us
in a position to appreciate this the foundations of Theosophic knowledge are
quite unshaken by such incidents as those on which you have been com.menting.—I am, Sir, yours, &c.,
p. SlNNETT.
N ovember 17.
WHOM
DID
THE
CIRCULAR
REFER
TO ?
[In reference to the subject of Mr. Sinnett’s letter, the following is an extract
from the Westminster Gazette under the heading;—“ More Theosophistry. A
Belated Piece of Bluff.”]
In the current number of the Review <f Reviews a letter appears
signed by the Dr. Keightley who lately wrote to The Westminster
Gazette as a professed representative of Mr. W. Q. Judge, Vice-President
of the Theosophical Society. The letter is worthy of some attention as
an illustration of the tactics of Mr. Judge’s friends, and of the line which
they were taking towards any allusion in the Press to certain events before
the appearance of the recent exposure in this journal.
The letter is dated October 25, and was therefore written at the time
when the Theosophists still hoped to maintain the great “ hush up ”
inaugurated at the Convention of last July, and before they dreamed that
all London would presently be discussing the facts which had been so
industriously buried.
The occasion of the letter appears to have been a comment of Mr.
Stead’s in the last number of the Review on a circular lately issued under
the title of “Occultism and Truth.” This circular was issued just after
the so-called “ Enquiry into Certain Charges against the Vice-President,”
and (to this office, at any rate) it was enclosed under one cover with the
pamphlet report of that “ Enquiry.” The substance of it is an assusance
to the Theosophical world, on the part of some prominent Theosophists, that
occultists have no more right than ordinary people to fib. Coming at the
time when it did, and signed as it was by all the principal official Theoso
phists, with the one exception of the vice-president, the Editor of the
Review of Reviews very naturally interpreted it as having some connexion
with the charges against the last-named gentleman, and with what his
colleagues evidently felt to be their apparent condonation of the “ occult
methods ” ascribed to him.
The following is the substantial passage in the letter thereupon
addressed to the Review or Reviews by Mr. Judge’s representatives :—
�92
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
. Allow us .to make a very necessary correction. . . . Mrs. Besant, who
originated the circular, was asked directly whether it was connected with the charges
or whether it was in any way aimed at Mr. Judge. She gave an emphatic denial to
both questions to many who took the same view expressed by you.
Another fact is not generally known, and leads people—yourselt among others_
imo unconsciously committing an injustice. The charges against Mr. Judge were
never substantiated, and the committee appointed to inquire into them declared that
they were illegally laid.
(The letter then concludes with a high tribute to Mr. Judge’s character for
truthfulness and every other virtue.)
Now, as regards the statement about the intention of the Circular, we
will only say that one co-signatory of it at least has committed himself to
the precise view of it which this letter denies. Nor is it oovious why the
heads of any society should issue a round robin to say it is naughty to
tell taradiddles, unless some current reference were intended to the affairs
of the society.
Besides, this, however, there is unmistakably conveyed the impression
that Mr. Judges accusers failed to substantiate their case, and that there
was something actually “ illegal,” in the ordinary sense of the word, about
some part of their conduct.
As readers of “Isis Very Much Unveiled” are aware, both these
things are absolutely untrue. The simple fact was that, owing to
the objections raised by Mr. Judge, no opportunity was given for
the charges to be either substantiated or the reverse ; while the only
justification for the statement that they were “ illegally laid ” is such
as can be squeezed out of the fact that the Theosophical Pickwickians
were persuaded by Mr. Judge that inquiry was forbidden by the constitu
tion of their society.
It only remains to add, to complete the disingenuousness of this very
Theosophistical letter, that its signator.es authenticate its statements by
flaunting the title of “Members of the Committee of Investigation”; the
committee referred to being the one which met only to decide that it could
not investigate, and the members of it as such having no knowledge whatever
of the evidence either on one side or the other !
�i
I
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
III.—LETTERS FROM MINOR OFFICIALS
PRIVATE MEMBERS.
93
AND
'll;
What matters “Truth or Falsehood?”
Sir,—My husband and myself are two of the officials in one of the
local branches of the Theosophical Society. I write in his name and my
own to say that we have read with some interest your voluminous attack on
the personal characters of some of our leading members.
We were also amused by the ingenuous surprise of your reporter, that
the Blavatsky Lodge meeting in London, which he attended, was spent in
philosophic study, not in the discussion of psychic phenomena or of the
personal characters of members.
You say (Chapter II.):—“This society as such must stand or fall
with its Mahatmas.” This is not so. The Theosophical Society is entirely
neutral on the question of the existence or non-existence of such beings, and
the reason why the charges, of which you have published a more or less
correct statement, were not gone into by the authorities of the T.S. was, that
to have done so would have entailed an infringement of that neutrality.
The question whether Mrs. Besant was misled when she made the state
ment at the Secular Hall in 1891 has been answered by her own clear with
drawal of that statement.
The question as to Mr. Judge is entirely one as to his own truth or false
hood, and may be well left to him to answer or not. It is not necessary for
the public or for the members of the Theosophic Society to judge him.—
Faithfully yours,
Sarah Corbett.
Manchester, November 6.
A Protest ag-ainst “Condoning-.”
Sir,—Having read the revelations your correspondent has been
pleased to give to the public, and presuming them to be correct, it seems to
me that there are now three parties at fault in place of two as I
had supposed, viz., Mr. Judge for imposing (whether consciously
as a deceiver or unconsciously as a medium obsessed by a spirit of
ambition and the communicator of the facts (if a member of
the inner circle) for breaking his solemn pledge not to reveal or
betray the affairs of that circle. The recent correspondence now adds others
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
as condoning the offence of Mr. Judge—and all this has come from the
love of pre-eminence and the mere dabbling (child’s play) with the
occult. Clearly, if the offence was proved, the officers of the society were
bound in truth and honour to expel the offender, and all would then have
My advice to the society would be to stick to
their programme, which is a highly laudable one, and let no word
from an invisible and unknown be taken as of any external value, but judged
only by its internal worth.
The society, it seems to me, can no longer pretend to condemn
the communication with Spirits as a dangerous thing, nor cry out
against the occasional frauds of mediums, in conscious or unconscious state,
seeing how heavily they have fallen into the same snare, nor can they point
the finger to frauds or delusions in other bodies whether Catholic or non
Catholic. A greater strictness and more uniform abstinence from flesh
eating and tobacco, as well as alcohol (which last they eschew) should
be enjoined on all its members by their authorised officers, and their
own three objects steadily pursued — separating from the third all
spurious imitations of magical wonders j and, above all, the spirit
of truth which accepts nothing on this or that authority without
careful verification should be cultivated.
A want of bravery to
do the right, to tell the truth, and face the consequences, is the
only thing that can be laid to the charge of the presiding officers
of the Indian and English sections. Are all societies and Churches
free from this? Has not a natural tenderness from long friendship,
and sympathy in noble and useful work, been often the cause of much to be
deplored ? And in this instance, is not such over-tenderness - of noble,
unsuspicious, and honourable souls, worthy rather of regret than of too severe
censure.—Yours,
A Theosophist.
been clear and straight.
‘ Ibandon tl»e T.S. in Bisgnst.”
SiR,—I see Mr. Mead is reported as saying that “what the articles
[in The Westminster Gazette] would do, if they did anything, was to
sift the society of those who had simply joined for the sake of the
‘marvellous.”
■ -.........................
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
95
This remark shows the same utter oblivion of the appreciation of truth
that has unhappily shown itself in the society’s record before. It is not a
question of phenomena; it is one of good faith ; and if this is the line taken,
not the phenomena-hunters merely, but seekers for truth and respecters of it,
who expected to find it in the Theosophical Society, will abandon that,
body in disgust.
Mr. Mead continues:—“Theosophists could no more divulge secrets
without violating every sense of honour than a Mason could.”
To compare the Theosophical Society, as at present constituted, with an.
honourable body like the Masons, is an insult to the latter, goose-guzzling
and luxuriant as they may have tended to become in these latter days.
There is a profound difference between hiding secrets, which are
entrusted to one, and which concern certain (perhaps) important facts
in the nature of man, and taking part in proceedings to gull a
niimber of fellow-students and the outside public.
This is prac
tically what has been done before, and the dissatisfied either disap
peared altogether or were well howled at as traitors to “the cause,”
Whereas, in verity, they were doing their best for the disowned cause of
truth ; or, again, they were coerced by the solemn warning of “ your pledge,
take care of your pledge,” and thereby intimidated from seeing that they
were making themselves parties to a continuous misrepresentation of facts and
a deliberate fraud upon their less-informed fellow-members, not to mention
the public. “ What have our troubles to do with the public ? ” has been the
question. I reply, “ Everything,” for it is to the public that constant appeal
is made and amonqst its ranks that proselytes are sought.
Nothing has, so far, been exposed in these articles that any rightthinking truth-seeker would wish to have cloaked. The public are not being
made acquainted with any arcane wisdom ; but if One-third of the state
ments made in The Westminster Gazette are supported by documentary
and other evidence, then the world certainly ought to be warned against
a society that takes as its motto, “ There is no religion higher than
TRUTH” and forthwith allows its leading members to play such antics
and engage in such grotesque jugglery without bringing them sternly to
book. As for continuing to work with these people in the establishment of a
�96
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
“ universal brotherhood,” rather will it become a universal imposture
to expose which were a service to the glorious old Wisdom of the
Venerable East, which it dishonoured by its sham Mahatmas.
Those who are publishing the facts, if facts they be, are doing a service
to the cause of truth, and should have the thanks and gratitude
of all of us in the Theosophical Society whose motive in being there is to
seek TRUTH, and to combat error and fraud in religion, mysticism, or
anything else.—I am, &c.,
A Fellow of the Theosophical Society and
Member of the E.S.T.
“It all comes of not Sticking- to Veg-etalbles.”
Sir,—With every word of Brother Old’s letter of to-day’s issue I beg
to express my fullest sympathy. I deprecate the tone of the “revelations,”
but of the necessity of making the public fully acquainted with the*"facts
I have not the least doubt. As to the existence of “ Mahatmas,”
I can only say I do believe in the existence on this earth of a higher order
of beings who, by total abstinence from and abhorrence of flesh-eating,
alchohol, and tobacco, and other evil and impure customs, and by adherence
to a fixed rule of life, retiring early and early rising, with daily ablutions,
and by certain studies and training of body and mind, have acquired certain
attributes and powers so far in advance of ordinary human beings as
to be regarded by them as miraculous. Of this I have had evidence,
not from Theosophists, but from personal friends resident in India
before ever they heard of the name of Theosophy. Whether any of
these have anything to do in the direction of the Theosophical Society is
quite another matter. There is Theosophy and Theosophy, and one of these
I would rather term “ Theophilosophy,” i.e., “ the love and wisdom of God,”
or “love and wisdom religion”—and not wisdom only as is implied in
the term “ Theosophy.” Readers of “ The Perfect Way ” and its companion
volume, “ Clothed with the Sun,” by that noble woman Anna Kingsford and
her-colleague, will know what I mean. Now, what about the future of the
Theosophical Society? I believe its officers may fall, but its work must
endure. No doubt of that. The founders have had their weaknesses and
foibles like other mortals, but I hope none will ever forget the gratitude they
owe to Madame Blavatsky, especially to the blessings she has conferred in
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
97
founding the Theosophical Society and giving through its means to all
•hungry and thirsty souls such priceless stores of knowledge and suggestive
thought (from the Oriental religions and philosophies which have made such'
deep impress on the millions of the East) as are contained in the grand
volumes of “The Secret Doctrine,” with its index and glossary, and her
o:her publications. None can read these volumes, but must ask themselves,
What manner of woman must she have been who devoted so many long
years of labour, from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. daily, in their production, and that
amidst incredible difficulties and' opposition and worry? Nor must we
forget the debt that we owe to Colonel Olcott and Madame Besant for having
made this knowledge accessible to all minds and conditions by their lectures
and booklets.
What can be more noble than the promotion of universal brotherhood
irrespective of sex, colour, caste, or creed, united in the study of the ancient
religions of East and West, and of all that pertains to the hidden powers in
man, and their development for the good of the race ? But these last, I say
again, will not be attained in purity but by prayer, and abstinence from flesh
meat, alcohol, and tobacco, and other evil customs of society, and the disuse
of all things .gotten by cruelty to, or oppression of, our fellow-creatures the
lower animals, and by pure surroundings.—Yours,
Evelyn-terrace, Brighton,
I. G. Ouseley, O.G.A. and F.T.S.
November 9.
• lolly and fraud: but of Mich is tire Kingdom.”
Sir,—No one should biame you, or resent the publication or tne Tacts.
Truth is the first consideration, and though we who have interested our
selves in the philosophy promulgated by the society may bitterly regret that
folly and fraud are to be found within its fold—as elsewhere—yet we can
rest assured that whatever there is in this philosophy which appeals to
the enlightened intelligence of mankind will remain when the superstructure
raised by designing intriguers or unwise enthusiasts shall have crumbled
away. It is in consequence of this belief that the writer, with others in the
society, can read with calmness, and not without some sense of amusement
this unpleasant disclosure ; not doubting but that a great deal of iu is true’
and that all may be so ; and while feeling unmixed contempt for the
G
�98
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
“ informer,” can acknowledge that any editor is well within his rights, and a
public benefactor, when exposing fraud wherever it is found.
Would that this feature were more pronounced in journalism generally,
and not indulged in only when such exposures fall in with public prejudice !
For several years the writer of this letter has been absent from the
Avenue-road centre : among other reasons, from a feeling of disapproval
of certain follies which may be called incipient relic worship, and which no
sensible person could tolerate for long. So it will be seen that all
Theosophists have not fallen under the spell of Mrs. Besant’s rash
enthusiasm, which has done, and is doing, so much to discredit her, now as
heretofore, in the eyes of the world. Yet, in spite of her indiscrimmation
and lack of sound judgment, which has alienated many, the writer would
rather stand in the pillory of public opprobrium with her than sit at a
banquet with the “ informer ” and those who can rejoice over the failings
of a beautiful soul. For it may be said of her, and a few others,
“ Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven.” That there is to be found even one of
these among Theosophists may lead a few to suspect that there is something
more in Theosophy than can be discovered in your articles, and that, though
fraud should be proved, there may nevertheless be real occultists and true
phenomena. Thus, what at first sight appears a serious blow to our
cause will perhaps induce further inquiry among your readers, while doing
useful work in destroying errors and growing superstition.
F. T. S.
�ISIS VERY HUGH UNVEILED.
PART
99
III.
LAST SHREDS OF THE VEIL OF ISIS.
A REVIEW OF SOME THEOSOPHISTRIES.
As yet, “ Isis Very Much Unveiled ” remains very much unanswered.
The oracles are dumb. “ No Dolphin rose, no Nereid stirred ” \ no
Mahatma “ precipitated ” a reply (as one of them did with such edifying
results in the case of the Kiddle plagiarism), nor disintegrated by
psychic force the damaging documents in my possession ; Mrs. Besant,
whose “ astral body ” has flitted across oceans to visit Mr. Herbert
Burrows “ on pre-arranged evenings,” gave no sign from Australia;
Colonel Olcott, president, in India, disdained the more commonplace
agency of the cable; and Mr. William Q. Judge, vice-president, whose
official adytum is but five days away at New York, neglected to avail
himself of the ordinary post, whatever he may have done about the
astral one.
Moreover, accustomed as are all these three officials to scouring
the earth, with all expenses paid, no intimation has been made public
G2
�ioo
ISIS VERY MUCH INVEILED.
as to the date when we may expect to receive anyone of them back
from the various regions to which they sped immediately after launching
the report of their peculiar “ Enquiry.”
Their colleagues in England
continue to speak as if a trip to New York carried one to the bourn
from which no traveller returns.
But what of these colleagues themselves ? Where is the “Voice of
the Silence” of Avenue-road, St. John’s Wood? At point after point,
the Story of the Great Mahatma Hoax touched matters to which one or
other or all of them must have been privy. It told of missives which
they had accepted as genuine, orders which they had acted upon,
decisions in which they had agreed, fact after fact of which they had
full cognisance. When Mr. Mead, the European secretary, gave out
that he did not reply because he was not attacked, I did my best tooblige him ; I began at the beginning, and challenged him at once as
having been present and taken part in the “Judge’s-plan-is-right ” deci
sion ; and I added that when he had denied my version of that I
would supply him with further matter for denial. Whereupon thediscreet European secretary subsided altogether.
The “ Sacred Oath ” Humbug-.
Of course, some excuse had to be offered, and we have been told
that what happens at meetings of the Esoteric Section is sacredly secret.
Now, first, that only covers a small part of my story, seme of which
dealt with circumstances surrounding official acts of the society or
its three sections. Secondly, the excuse is eminently one that accuses,
by implying that what I say happened at those meetings did happen;
for presumably members take no oath to keep secret what does not
occur ? But, thirdly, this alleged secrecy is a mere pretext; else how
could Mrs. Besant publicly refer on platforms to “ supernatural ” expe
riences at those meetings ; and Messrs. Old and Edge (the latter to this
day holding office) raise questions about one such matter in print in
Colonel Olcott’s journal; and Mrs. Besant, the Colonel, and a full
council of officials notify Mr. Judge that in a certain eventuality (which
did afterwards occur) they would make a “ full publication covering all
the details ” of that matter, and others concerning the sacred Mahatma
messages ?
Whatever may be the “ quasi-Masonic oath ” of which we nohr
hear, they evidently held that it did not bind them to conceal, with their
eyes open, a fraud upon their fellow-members ; and those who do so
interpret it only throw a very suggest ve light on their own action in
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
ioi
^willingly taking such an oath. Was Mrs. Besant quite right when
she - gave the public what she confesses was a “ misleading
account ” of these secrets, and only in the wrong.'" when,
along with Colonel Olcott and the rest, she proposed to give
what she now knew to be the correct one F
Is the position
that a Theosophist may “tell”—anything he likes, except the truth?
A Survey of the Present Situation.
The absence of Colonel Olcott and Mrs. Besant does not'alter the
fact that he with others made, and she publicly adopted, certain
■charges against Mr. Judge, vice-president. And the silence of their
•colleagues in England does not disguise the fact that my account of
the details has not been challenged as to one single event, letter, or
facsimile. The published “ Report of an Enquiry ” cries aloud for some
■explanation : the explanation of “ Isis Very Much Unveiled ” holds the
field untouched. It leaves the vice-president only able to exculpate
himself, if at all, by further inculpating them. The “ full rebuttal
■evidence held in reserve,” therefore, at which his professed representa
tive in England hints, can be formidable only to the Theosophical
Society, not to its critics. I am bound to say, however, that if the
would-be impressive fragments of it which have been privately adum
brated to me are fair samples of the rest, it is not calculated to be
formidable to anybody. When the “ affidavits ” hinted at have been
published, or otherwise submitted to examination, I can promise them
all the attention they deserve. To say that any affidavit, until cross.examined upon, is worth exactly as much as the paper it is written
on would be an uncalled-for slight upon the paper-maker.
The Excommunication of “Brother* Old.”
A word or two about the attempt to create a diversion by
attacking the character of the one Theosophical official who has had
the honesty to resign office rather than shut his eyes to a
fraud on the public. The attack on Mr. Old cannot in any case
discredit the story I have narrated. First, because the largest and
most important part of that story is from the undenied written
evidence of persons still holding office in the society, and especially
�«i©2
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
of its “ President-Founder.”
Secondly, because, even as regards
Mr. Old’s part, the character of a witness is only a relevant
consideration where the truth of his testimony is disputed.
What I am now about to say is said, therefore, merely in justice toMr. Old himself. The attack on him has two lines. It is said that
he had to perjure himself to give any information whatever. It ishinted that what information he did give was given for money.
The former charge turns- entirely on the “sacred oath”
humbug, which I have discussed already.
As to the latter, it
is true to my knowledge that for the part he has taken in
fulfilling what he regards as a public duty to truth, Mr. Old
neither asked nor received any consideration whatever. My own
acquaintance with Mr. Old began in an odd way, not without bearing
on the question of his sincerity. At the time of the Salvation Army
riots at Eastbourne, a gallant old Englishman, who could not
bear that women, under any provocation, should be publicly
assaulted in English streets, went down there to stand up for the
“Hallelujah lasses.”
He asked, through the Pall Mall Gazette,
for five hundred Englishmen to help.
He got five.
This
Quixotic gentleman, this modern Sieur de Marsac, was my friend Mr.
Charles Money, of Petersfield. I went myself to see that he did not
get his head broken more than was necessary. His company, as seedy
a lot of knights-errant as ever I saw, consisted mainly of Cockney
journalists who did not believe in God. But one—a spruce, slight
youth—declared himself a Theosophist. The adventurers spouted toa yelling mob, got off with whole skins, and by testimony of the local
police actually achieved their end. But Mr. Money and one
other were knocked about a bit in the crowd. That other—he
quitted himself like a man—was Mr. W. R. Old, Theosophist.
I may be wrong : it was but a street row; but I regard that as a more
practical service on Mr. Old’s part to the “ Universal Brotherhood of
Humanity than all the hundredweights of vapid moralising on the
subject ever vomited from “The H.P.B. Press.”
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
103
Stewing- in tlie Judge Juice.
Except Mr. Old, one prominent Theosophist, and one alone, has
so far publicly faced the facts. Mr. Herbert Burrows has had the
honesty and the courage to say out that this thing must be answered
by Mr. Judge, and fully, or he for one will quit the society. Mr.
.Burrows forgets that others besides Mr. Judge have made them
selves answerable. Other correspondents, again, represented other
factions, and showed how the society is seething with distrust and
shame. But the mass of the letters only serve to prove that, whatever
else the “ occult powers ” of the T'heosophists may be, they do not
include a command either of plain English or of straight argument.
If “ Isis ” does not yet stand before us absolutely like Hans Breitmann’s “ maiden mit nodings on,” it is a painfully thin fabric of
Theosophistries which alone shelters her from the cold wind of public
contempt. Let us examine it.
The Theosophistpy about Proving- a Negative.
“ After ally you have not proved that Mahatmas do not exist, nor
that occult phenomena cannot occurV
Certainly I have not, nor did I ever propose to try. I am quite
prepared to believe in both when evidence for them has been produced,
and has stood the test of such ordinary evidential canons as have
been applied to kindred subjects—for instance, by the Psychical
Research Society. All that I have said is that certain evidence
on which the Theosophical Society has been building proves nothing
whatever, except the existence of a hotbed of humbug within the
society itself. As for the Mahatmas, there is no difficulty about con
ceiving that illiterate, twaddling, and mendacious beings of a secondrate order of intelligence, such as those reflected in the “ missives ”
wh:ch I have reproduced, may exist in Tibet as they unhappily do
elsewhere. ’But when we are told that these beings have acquired
powers which rise superior to time and space, and that they use these
for communicating “ in a quasi-miraculous manner ” with the Theo
sophical Society, we ask for facts; and we get—such facts as were
investigated by Dr. Hodgson and his colleagues, and such facts as
�ïO4
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
have been exposed in “ Isis Very Much Unveiled.” What else is there ?
One Theosophist directs me to “ our literature on. the subject,
which is copious. I don’t doubt it; but it is not “ literature ” that I
am in search of. Another declares “ it does not all depend on Madame
Blavatsky and Mr. Judge; others have seen Mahatmas.” It seems
that Mrs. Besant has been telling her Australian audiences that she
herself has been so favoured (just as she told the Hall of Science
audience that she had been favoured with supernatural missives). Well,
how did Mrs Besant know her Mahatma ? By his “ portrait,” I sup
pose, as others have done. And how was that portrait produced ?
M hen Madame Blavatsky began to spell spiritualism “Theosophy,”
and turned her “spirit-control”
“John King,” of whom
Colonel Olcott tells, into Master Koot Hoomi — whom she
again subordinated, after the Kiddle exposure, to Mahatma Morya, whom
she, in turn, after the S.P.R. Report, left over for exploitation by
Mr.Judge when Madame started the Mahatma on this chequered
career, it was one of her earliest steps to secure a counterfeit present
ment of her creation. Various artists and amateurs were set to paint
portraits under occult inspiration. The results may all have resembled
the Protean Mahatma; some of them were strikingly unlike each other.
I he two best were done by Mr. Schmiechen, now a society portrait
painter, partly out of his head, partly from directions given by Madame,
and partly from a photograph of a typical Hindu which she gave him
lor the purpose. Madame identified one as Koot and the other as
Morya, and declared they were speaking likenesses-—an opinion which
nobody else was in a position to contradict. They hang to-day in the
“ Occult Room ” at Adyar, and are declared to have been painted
from the respective “astral bodies” of their subjects. Colonel Olcott,
president, who knows their origin perfectly well, exhibits them reverently
to barefoot disciples doing “puja.”
Photographs from the" fancy
portrait of “M,” in locked cases, have been distributed to the Esoteric
few; Mrs. Besant always works with one facing her; Madame
Blavatsky made it part of a chela's course to spend some time daily
staring at the image, and deliberately trying to “ visualise ” it in corners
of the room. What wonder it some of them have succeeded ? It would
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
105
have been contrary to all experience of the phenomena of self-hypnotic
hallucination if they had not.
The thing only begins to call for
examination when the figure thus “ visualised ” leaves something not
entirely psychic behind him. The Master who left a shower of roses
■once at Adyar turned out to have been M. Coulomb, eked out with
a mask, a bladder, and some white muslin; and the roses were traced
elsewhere than to Tibet. And the Master who precipitated the Judge
missives?——But perhaps the Theosophists would prefer not to put
him forward. When they have something better, I shall be glad to
hear of it.
The Theosophistpy of Throwing Over the Mahatmas.
“ What matter even if the Mahatmas do not exist, and the phenomena
.are frauds I There still remain those sublime ideas which,” &c., &c.
I was quite prepared for this particu’ar Theosophistry. That was why
I started, at the very beginning of my story (Chapter II.), by showing
what an enormous practical part the Mahatmas and their miracles have
played in the movement. It is easy for this Theosophist or that to
protest that they never attracted him. The fact remains that the big
accessions to the society’s numbers have always followed on the miracle
“booms,” alike under Madame Blavatsky and under Mrs. Besant.
Moreover, it is not possible, even argumentatively, to dissociate
“ those 'sublime ideas,” &c., from the Mahatmas on whose
authority Madame Blavatsky gave them out. If she spoke truth, they
were the real authors of “ Isis Very Much Unveiled” and of “The
Secret Doctrine.” If she lied, and the authority for those teachings is
her own, what is that lying authority worth ? I need not labour the
point, as it was conclusively proved long ago by Mrs. Besant herself.
In an article in Lucifer of December, 1890, addressed apparently to
certain Theosophical schismatics who showed a tendency to throw over
alike their foundress and her “ Masters,” Mrs. Besant accomplished the
easy task of showing that the society was tied hand and foot to both.
It was founded by Her at the bidding of “ Them ” : They have been
the deus ex machind whenever She was in a fix, and the society has so
accepted Them. It can be “ neutral ” about Them, and Their
�106
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
miracles, and Their prophetess, only when an heir is neutral about his
own title-deeds. As Mrs. Besant puts it in a nutshell: “ If there are
no Masters, then the Theosophical Society is an absurdity.”
The Theosophistpy of Throwing Over the “Inner Group.”
“ The Esoteric Section is a private body, not officially connected with
the Theosophical Society ; so the Society is not responsible for miracle
mongering in the Section.”
The so-called Esoteric Section or E.S.T. (“ Eastern School of Theo
sophy”), of which the High-priesters and the Vice-President are now
quarrelling for the headship, and, in the words of the latter official, “ the
core of the Theosophical Society.” The Inner Group, again, is the core
of the E. S. T. Both were the special creation of the Society’s foun
dress. The Group was to contain her top pupils The members
of the group are almost to a man officials of the Society, living
at the Society’s expense. With the one exception of Colonel
Olcott, practically all the high panjandrums are included in it.
Lastly, if it has been the centre of the Mahatma communications, it is
a centre that has radiated them in all directions to the society’s cir
cumference. The plop of a missive sends a ripple from the Inner
Group to the Esoteric Section, from the Esoteric Section to the society
at large, and from the society to rhe public.
Well, the yolk of an egg is not officially connected with the outer
portion ; but when the yolk is bad, we call it a rotten egg without
further parley.
The Theosophistpy of Throwing Over the Society’s Personnel.
But that brings me to the most barefaced Theosophistry of all:
“ Even if all our officials be proved to have lied and cheated, there still
remains untouched their grand ethical teaching ” /
I simply state this, and leave it. Like the coster when his barrow
broke down, “ Friends, I ain’t ekal to it.” I cannot do justice to such
colossal impudence. “Truth survives all attacks she does; she will even
survive Theosophical defences. “ The noble religions and philosophies
of the East exist ”; they do, as they did long centuries before the
Theosophical Society was heard of, and will do long centuries after it
has been forgotten. But when Mahatmas, and miracles, and the
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
107
founders, and the officials, and the official acts of the Theosophical
Society are all thrown over—What remains of the society ?
“ We have absolutely no creed,” the European secretary
told an interviewer the other day—(all unfettered by the
fact that he distributes broadcast Mrs. Besant’s “Introduction
to Theosophy ” with a complete pseudo-Buddhistic cosmology about
the Seven Planes, &c., authenticated by direct reference to the Masters,
and particularising, for instance, that “ Devachan ” lasts “ for average
persons some fifteen centuries”!)—“Absolutely no creed.” “You
would simply call yours a moral or religious society, then ? ” asked the
puzzled interviewer. To which Mr. Mead naively replies, “ I don’t
exactly know what you would call z/.”—(Sunday Tinies^ Nov. 11.)
Since scholarship has opened the stores of the East to Western
culture, there has been a natural awakening of popular interest in Eastern
directions. While that lasts, people discussing each other’s souls will
continue to sprinkle their remarks, harmlessly enough, with those
mingled jargons which make a true Orientalist smile. If “Theosophy”
means that, “Theosophy ” has certainly some life before it; but as for
the Theosophical Society—“ why cumbereth it the ground? ” It is an
organised machine for taking in the Honest Enthusiast at one end,
passing him through the stages of the Willing Dupe and the Con
scientious Humbug, and turning him out at the other end at worst a
conscious fraud, at best a dreary and disillusioned cynic.
Enough of the logical and ethical fog that Theosophy diffuses !—
the Mahatmosphere, as one might call it. It is a relief to escape from
it into the fresh air of common honesty and common sense.
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
Io8
POSTSCRIPT.
A
THE
MAHATMA
AT
VICE-PRESIDENT’S
BAY :
TRUMP
CARD.
The following appeared in the BAs/wzwsiter Gazette^ under the
headings: “ OPEN SPLIT BETWEEN THEOSOPHICAL
OFFICIALS”; “RIVAL REVELATIONS FROM THE
SAME MASTER”; “MR. JUDGE GETS A MISSIVE DE
POSING MRS. BESANT ”
Just as the Story of the Great Mahatma Hoax is going to press
in" its collected form, just in the nick of time to be included,
comes the material for a new chapter of more extravagant
humour than all the rest. Readers of the “ Isis ” chapters will recall
that the Theosophic embroglio has gone through the following stages:—
(1) The vice-president’s “Mahatma” makes reflections on the president.
(2) The president and other officials make charges of “forging”
Mahatma missives against the V.P.
(3) Mrs. Besant, after
some vacillation, adopts these charges, and joins with the
others in offering the V.P. the choice of retiring quietly
or an exposure. (4) The V.P. bluffs them all into silence, and they
all join in inducing the “ Convention ” of last July to separate
without looking further into the matter. (5) Mrs. Besant and the V.P.
“ join hands,” in public, on her statement that though he wrote the
alleged missives “ with his own hand,” yet he had “ psychically received”
their contents from the Mahatma. (6) In private, Mrs. Besant separates
herself from the V.P. by dissolving their joint headship of the
Esoteric Section (“ the core of the Theosophical Society,” as Mr. Judge
justly calls it below) : Mr. Judge, V.P., to retain the American section
oc the section, and she herself the European, to which she has since
added the Indian.
Now we learn Phase 7. Seven is a highly Theosophical numeral,
and this phase is certainly a rich one. Mr. Judge sends round to the
�ISIS VERY [MUCH CM VEILED.
iog>
Esoteric Section a pamphlet in ^which he announces that Mrs. Besant
is, in effect, possessed of a devil, and that the Mahatma (under whose
direction she also professes to be acting) has ordered him to depose
her altogether, and take over the whole thing himself! ! Which, in
a formal “ Order,” he accordingly proceeds to do.
The pamphlet, which among other things professes to give the Jud^e
version of the true inwardness of the abortive “Enquiry” in July,
has just been sent round to the'Esoteric Theosophists. Copies were
not sent to some who were considered dangerous ; but the recent
unveiling has made a good many so who were safe enough,
from the Judge point of view, before, and thanks to one of the e
who does not acknowledge-any headship of Mr. Judge over the Euro
pean Esotericists since Mrs. Besant’s dissolution thereof, it is possib.e
to give to mankind what was meant by Mr. Judge for a party. . The
following are the salient passages, followed by the Order deposing
Mrs. Besant (the titles in capitals are Mr. Judge’s; the paragraph •
headings are not):—
BY MASTER’S DIRECTION.
I now send you this, all of it being either direct quotations from the
messages to me, or else in substance what I am directed to say to you,
the different details and elaborations being my own.
We have now to deal with the E. S.T. and with our duty to it and toeach other ; and among those others, to Mrs. Besant.
The Greatness of Wm. Q. Judge.
I am not a pledged member of the E.S T., and never made a pledge
in it, as my pledges were long before to the Master direct. I was one of
its founders, with H. P.B., and she, at the beginning, made me manager
and teacher in it from the first, under her, for the American part
especially. You can remember all she said of that. I wrote the rules
of the E.S.T. myself in London in 1888 at H.P.B.’s request, and
under the direction of the Master. Those were not altered by her, but
after reading them and further consulting the Master she added somegeneral paragraphs. I am the only one standing in that position. Mrs.
Besant and all other members are pledged and certified in the ordinary
way. . . .
An Inner Group was later on formed by H.P. B. at London, so that she
�lio
ISIS VERY MUCH -UNVEILED,
might give out teachings to be recorded by the members, and, if possible
teach them practical Occultism. O: this Mrs. Besant, with George Mead
to help her, was made the Secretary, because she had great ability in a
literary way, was wholly devoted, and perfectly fit for the task. But this
did not make her a teacher.
The Littleness of Mps. Besant.
•
Therdeath of
destroyed, of course, any further value in the
office of “ Recorder.”
The conversations of H.P.B. with the Inner Group were taken down
in a more or less fragmentary form by the different members, in notes,
and later Mrs. Besant and George Mead wrote them out, as Secretaries,
have a complete copy of these, and so has each member of the Inner
Group, and those copies comprise all the “Instructions” left in the
possession of Mrs. Besant or the Inner Group. In my possession, and
within my control, is a large body of instructions given to me all the
time from 1875, which I shall give out and have given out, as far as I am
directed. ...
Mrs. Annie Besant has been but five years in this work, and not all of
that time engaged in occult study and practice.......................
Since 1889 she has done great service to the T.S. and devoted herself
to it. But all this does not prevent a sincere person from making errors
in Occultism, especially when he, as Mrs. Besant did, tries to force himself
along the path of practical work in that field. Sincerity does not confer
of itself knowledge, much less wisdom.
Singular Disinterested ..ess of Wm. Q. Judge.
I wish it to be clearly understood that Mrs. Besant has had herself no
conscious evil intention : she has simply gone for awhile outside the line of
her Guru (H.P. B.), begun work with others, and fallen under their
influence. We should not push her farther down, but neither will the true
sympathy we have blind our eyes, so as to let her go on, to the detri
ment of the movement.
I could easily retire from the whole T. S., but
my conceptions of duty are different, although the personal cost
to myself in this work is heavy, and as I am ordered to stay I will stay
and try my best to aid her and everyone else as much as possible. And
the same authority tells me that “ could she open her eyes and see her
real line of work, and correct the present condition in herself as well as the
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
in
one she has helped to make in the T.S. and E.S.T., she would find
herself in mental, spiritual, and physical conditions of a kind much better
than ever before, for her present state is due to the attacks of the dark
powers, unconsciously to her.
Black Magic and. the Plot Behind the Scenes.
And now it becomes necessary under instructions received to give the
members of the School some account of the things behind the scenes in
connexion with the recent investigation attempted at London upon the
charges against me. ...
I was made the object of an attack in the guise of an attempt to
purify the Society, and Mrs. Besant was thrown forward as the official
accuser of myself—a friend who was certified to her by H.P. B., her
teacher, well known as working for the T.S. for many years. All this
needs light, and the best interests ol Mrs. Besant and of the E.S.T.
demand that some of the secret history shall be given out,
however disagreeable it may be, in order that the very purgation which
was improperly directed to the wrong quarter shall take p ace now. The
difficulty arose when in January or February Annie Besant finally lent
herself unconsciously to the plot which I detail herein.
The plot exists among the Black Magicians, who ever war against the
White, and against those Black ones we were constantly warned by H.P.B.
This is no fiction, but a very substantial ¡act. I have seen and also been
shown the chief entity among those who thus work against us. . . .
How Mr. Judge’s Master Caught Out Mrs. Besant's Friend.
The name of the person who was worked upon so as to, if possible,
use him as.a minor agent of the Black Magicians, and for the influencing
of Mrs. Besant, is Gyanendra N. Chakravarti, a Brahman, of Allahabad,
India, who came to America on our invitation to the Religious Parliament
in 1893. He permitted ambition to take subtle root in his heart ;
he is no longer in our lines.
He was then a Chela of a minor
Indian Guru, and was directed to come to America by that Guru, who
had been impressed to so direct him by our Master. . . . While
in that relation he was telepathically impressed in Chicago with some of
the contents of a message received by me from the Master.
It corro
borated outwardly what I had myself received.
It was, however, but
a part, and was, moreover, deficient in matter, Chakravarti himself being
only aware of it as a mental impression, and I am informed that at the time
�II2
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
he was not fully aware of what he was doing. His. ability to be used asanunconscious vehicle was made known to me when he was made to receive the
message. Although he was not fully aware ol it, not only was the whole of his
tour here well guarded and arranged, but he was personally watched by the
agents ot the Master’s scattered through the country unknown to him, who
reported to me.
On several occasions he has taken people into his con
fidence, believing that he was instructing them, when in fact they
were observing him closely from the Lodge, helping him where right, and
noting him fully, though they did not tell him so. This was also so in
those parts of his tour when he believed himself alone or only with Mrs
Besant. ...
“If I am a Fraud so are H.P.B. and the Masters.”
If I was guilty of what I was accused, then Master would be shown
as conniving at forgery and lying—a most impossible thing. The only
other possibility is that Mr. Chakravarti and I “ got up ’’ the message.
But he and Mrs. Besant have admitted its genuineness, although she is
perectly unable herself to decide on its genuineness or falsity; but further
Mrs. Besant admitted to several that she had seen the Master himself
come and speak through my body while I was perfectly conscious. Andstill further, H.P.B. gave me in 1889 the Master’s picture, on which he
put this messege, “To my dear and loyal colleague, W. Q. Judge.”
Now, then, either I am bringing you a true message from the Master,
or the. whole T. S. and E. S.T, is a lie, in the ruins of which must be
buried the names of H.P.B. and the Masters. All these stand together
as they fall together.
How Mrs. Besant Privately Thinks H.P.B. a Fraud.
As final proof of the delusions worked through this man and hisfriends, I will mention this
Many years ago—in 1881—the Masters
sent to the Allahabad Brahmans (the Prayag T.S.) a letter which
was delivered by H.P.B. to Mr. A. P. Sinnett, who handed a
copy over to them, keeping the original; it dealt very plainly
with the Brahmans. This letter the Brahmans do nc t like, and
Mr. Chakravarti tried to make me think it was a pious fraud by
H.P.B. He succeeded with Mrs. Besant in this, so that since she met
him she has on several occasions, said she thought it was a fraud
by H.P.B., made up entirely, and not from the Master. I say now on.
Master’s authority that it was from the Master, and is a right letter. Only
�IQIS VERY ML CH LNVEILED.
“3
delusion would make Mrs. Besant take this position: deliberate intention]
makes the others do it.
It is an issue which may not be evaded, lor if
that letter be a fraud, then ail the rest sent through our old teacher and
on which Esoteric Buddhism was made, are the same. I shall rest on
that issue : we all rest on it.
Mrs. Besant’s Rival Revelations.
Mrs. Besant was then made to agree with these people under the
delusion that it was approved by the Masters.
--------- She regarded herself
as their servant.
It was against the ___ _
E.S.T. rules.
When the
rule is broken it is one’s duty to leave the E.S.T.
, and when
I got the charges from her I asked her
to leave it if
it did not suit her. The depth of the plot
was not shown
to Mrs. Besant at all, for if it 'had been
she would have
refused, Nor was Colonel Olcott aware of it.
Mrs. Besant was
put in such a frightful position that while she was writing me most kindly
and wnrkincr With ma eko was «11 the time thinking that - was a former
__
- 1•
. I
7
and working with me she
all
and that I had blasphemed the Master. She was made to conceal from
me, when here, her thoughts about the intended charges, but was made to
tell Mr. B. Keightley, in London, and possibly few others. Nor until
the time was ripe did she tell me, in her letter, in January, from India
y II"16!0 res£nfrom the E.S.T. and the T.S. offices, saying that
rf I did and would confess guilt, all would be forgiven, and everyone
would work with me as usual. But I was directed differently/and fully
informed. She was induced to believe that the Master was endorsing
the prosecution, that he was ordering her to do what she did. At
the same time, I knew and told her that it was the plan there to have
° On? °,cott res'gn when I had been cut off, the presidency to be then
to er’ •
waS
to her, and she was made to believe it was
the Masters wish for her “not to oppose.” She then waited. I did not
resign, and the plot so far was spoilt for the time. .
She felt and expressed to me the greatest pain to have to do such
t mgs to me. I knew she so felt, and wrote her that it was the Black
Magmians. She replied, being still under the delusion, that I was failing
to do Master’s will.
6
How Mrs. Besant Tried Witchcraft.
Her influencers also made her try psychic experiments on me and on
two others in Europe. They failed. On me they had but a passing
effect, as I was cognisant of them; on one of the others they
H
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
114
reflected on health, although she did not desire any harm at all : she was
made
think it best and for my good. She then sent word to these
people that she had not succeeded. This is all the effect■
P
delusion ; the variance between such things and her «sual charaCter u
shown in her all the time writing me the most kind letters. In
this Mr. Chakravarti was her guide, with others. She was writing
all the time about it. He went so far as to write me on a matter he w
supposed to know nothing of: “No matter what Annie may do to you as
co-head of the E.S. she means you no harm.”
■
'
“Every Man His Own Mahatma.”’
, '
Informed as I was of these inside facts, I drew up under Masters
direction my circular on the charg s in March, 1894, and‘ l^eM°ul^n*
what would be done. It was all done as I said, and as the Master in
March told me would be the case. The London investigation ended as
Master predicted through me in my circular, tand for t e en
TS
But all that time the conspirators used all means aga
.
They had all sorts of letters sent me from J"«» “VuXur
messages from the Masters asking me to resign and confess. But Master
“ept me informed and told me what steps to take. He even told me ha ,
much as it might seem the contrary from the official papers, Colonel Olcot
would be the central figure and the one through whom the adjustment
would come.
This also turned out true.
Migration of Mahatmas to-New York?
.. The Master says that the T.S. movement was begun by Them m t e
West by western people ; that cyclic law requires the work in the West
the benefit of the world ; that They do not live in India.
They also say that Nature’s laws have set apart woe for t
h
spit back in the face of their teacher, for those who try to belittle he
work, and make her out to be part good and part fraud. . . .
q{
A distinct object H.P.B. bad m view I will now, on the _Jth y
the Master, tell you, unrevealed before by H.P.B. to anyone else hat I
know of: it is, the establishment in the West of a great seat of learn g,
where shall be taught and explained and demonstrated the great theor
of man and nature'which she has brought orward to us ^ere Western
occultism, as the essence combined out of a 11 o
^al^be taught^
I also state on the same authority that H.P. .
hated.
...
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
”5
We are all, therefore, face to face with the question whether we will
abide by Masters and their Messenger on the one hand, or by the
disrupting forces that stand on the other, willing to destroy our great
mission if we will but.give them the opportunity.
“I Daclap© Mps. Bssant's Headship at an End!”
The pamphlet closes with the following “E.S.T. ORDER,” dated
November 3, and signed in manuscript:—
I now proceed a step further than the E.S.T. decisions of 1894, and
solely for the good of the E.S.T. I resume in the E.S.T.,.in full, all
the functions and powers given to me by H. P. B. and that came to me by
orderly succession a ter her passing from this life, and declare myseli the
sole head of the E.S.T. This has been done already in America. So
far as concerns the rest of the E.S.T. I may have to await the
action of the members, but I stand ready to exercise those functions
in every part of it. Hence, under the authority given me by the Master
and H.P.B., and under Master’s direction, I declare Mrs. Annie Besant’s
headship in the E.S.T. at an end.
This, then, is Mr. Judge’s response to the case against him, and,
as was expected, it takes the form of attacking his colleagues, but
keeps strictly to generalities as regards the evidence against himself.
The date affixed is one when Mr. Judge had probably heard of the
articles in The Westminster by cable, but had no idea of the
detailed nature of’ the attack.
The parts quoted throw many
interesting side-lights, but perhaps the most delightful thing
is the picture presented of all the Theosophists playing off
the Mahatma on one another:
Mr. Judge, Mrs. Besant,
Mr. Chakravarti, and others, giving the most contradictory messages
from the same Tibetan source ; and Mr. Judge now finally “ going one
better ” than all the rest, for has he not, in a very real sense, the
Mahatma in his pocket ?
�n6
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
At any rate, the battle has now well begun. The prophets of
Baal are cutting, not the.nselves as of old, but one another. More
' power to all their elbows 1
Mrs. Besant was willing enough to accept Mr. Judge’s anti-Olcott
missives as “ psychically ” from the Mahatma ; we shall now see how
it strikes her when the same weapon is turned against herself. *
[In the same issue was published a “ vote of censure passed on the
President by one of the local ‘Lodges’ of the T.S. ‘(Bournemouth),
declaring that the articles recently published|in the Westminster Gazette
disclose a prima facie case against the Vice-President,” “ of fraud upon
his fellow Theosophists.” “ The Vice-President should not continue to
lie,” the Bournemouth Lodge remarks, “ under such a charge.” Other
Lodges have also taken one side or the other.]
k
I
We have seen.
Vide Preface.
�ISIS VERY ML CH UNVEILED.
THE SOCIETY UPON THE
HIMALAY.
117
"
(THEO5OPHICALLY ADAPTED FROM BRET HARTE.)
I reside at Table Mountain, and my name is Truthful James ;
I am not fond of pious frauds or Oriental games;
And I’ll tell in simple language, as well as I can say,
What broke up our Society upon the Himalay.
But first I would remark that there must needs be painful scenes
When Theosophic gents begin to give each other Beans ;
And though Mahatma missives do pan out a little queer,
We should avoid disturbances in the Mahatmosphere.*
Now nothing could be nicer or more full of harmony
Than the first few months that followed the decease of “H.P.B.”;
-Till Judge of Calaveras produced a curious set
Of missives in red pencil what he said were from Tibet, f
From these he reconstructed a Mahatma (very rare),
A Nest of that peculiar kind pertaining to a Mare;
But Mrs. Besant found a rival missive on the shelf, J
And said she fancied Mr. Judge had written his himself. §
Then Judge’s smile took on a most unpleasant sort of curve;
He said he would not trespass so on Mrs. B.’s preserve.
He was a most resourceful man, that quiet Mr. Judoe :
He got another missive saying Mrs. B.’s was fudge.||
Now, it is not edifying for a Theosophic priest
To call another one a fraud—to all intents, at least;
Nor should the individual who happens to be meant
Reply by throwing things about to any great extent.
Then Olcott, H., of Adyar, raised a point of order, when
A chunk of old red pencil took him in the abdomen ; 51
And he smiled a kind of sickly smile and curled up on the floor,
And the subsequent proceedings interested him no more.**
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
Ïi8
For, in less time than I write it, all the meeting got upset
With “ precipitating ” missiles which did noi come from Tibet ;
And the" things they called each other in their anger-wer-e-a sin—
Till the public got disgusted, and thè temple roof caved in.
And this is all I have to say of these improper games,
For I live at Table Mountain and my name is Truthful James}
And I've told in simple language all I know about the fray
That broke up our Society upon the Himalay.
* “ Any action in these controversial matters tends to set up a perfect whirlwind
on other planes.’’—Mrs. Besar.t in Lucifer.
+ “ Mahatma Morya affects red pencil, Koot Hoomi blue.”—“ Isis Very Much
Unveiled.”
J “ She wrote .... it was Master’s wish'.... that Master ordered her to do
as she did.”—Mr. Judge’s circular to the E.S.T. ..
:§ “ I now know that they were written by Mr. Judge.”—Mrs. Besant, “Report
of an Enquiry,” &c.
|| “ Under Master’s direction, I declare Mrs. Besant’s headship at an end.”—
Mr. Judge’s circular to the E.S.T.
“Isis,” Chapters IX., X.
** “ I declare, as my opinion, that this e’nquiry must go no farther.”—Colonel
Olcott, “ Report of all Enquiry,” &c.
F. E. G.
a.
rio ’o
o
. . A
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
“WHEN AUGUR
MEETS
1x9
AUGUR”—
“ It is rather a squalid fight between the augurs that the curtain has been
raised upon ; but it has got to be fought out now before the public, and it is in
vain tn try to ring the curtain down again.”
�I
|| fi
II •
■ H' '
'
■
0
•>
. jr
•i
<F
W
"
lOÈfetïff-;-'
• •' ■■--■
* f
f -
i
IflL
�ÎSÏS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
■ Î21
3
t
“ISIS
VERY
MUCH
UNVEILED.”
A REPLY FROM MR. WILLIAM Q. JUDGE.
To the Editor of The Westminster Gazette.
Sir,—You have published slanderous articles against the
Theosophical Society, using me as the person ; you have asked for a
reply; I send it to you and ask that it be given place in your paper.
•—Yours truly,
William Q. Judge.
Theosophical Society, American Section,
General Secretary’s Office, New York, Nov. 26.
To the Editor of The Westminster Gazette.
Sir,—At the time your articles directed against the Theosophical
Society under the above title were appearing, I was lecturing in the
country, and only within a few days have I seen your last numbers.
Time is required for writing on such a subject, and at this distance
from London I cannot be accused of much delay. With the greatest
interest and amusement I have read your long series of articles. The
writer is an able man, and you and he together constitute one of the
advertising agencies of the Theosophical Society. The immense range of
your notices cannot be well calculated, and very truly we could never
pay for such an advertisement. Do you mind keeping this part of my
letter as all the remuneration we can give you for the work done by
�122
ISIS VERY MUCH UN VEILED.
you in thus advertising the movement and bringing prominently to the
notice of your public the long-forgotten but true doctrine of the possible
existence of such beings as Professor Huxley says it would be
impertinent to say could not exist in the natural order of evolution ?
And while I look at it all as an'^advertisement, I cannot admire
the treason developed therein, nor the spiteful unworthy tone of it,
nor the divergence from fact in many cases when it suited the purpose,
nor the officious meddling in the private affairs of other people, nor
the ignoring and falsification in respect to possible motive, made out
by you to be gain by some of us, when the fact is that we are all
losers of money by our work. That fact a candid person would
have stated, and marvelled at it that we should be willing to slave
for the Theosophical Society, and always spend our money. Such
a person would have given “ the devil his due.” You have suppressed
it and lied about it, and hence it is not admirable in you, but is quite
mean and low. You advertise us and then try to befoul us. Well,
we gain by the advertisement, and the course of time will wipe off the
small stain you try to paint upon us. When you and your ready
writer are both dead and forgotten, and some of you probably execrated
for offences not as yet exposed, we will still live as a body and be
affecting the course of modern thought, as we have been doing for
nearly twenty years.
I am the principal object of your attack, though you also cruelly
abuse a woman who has long enough fought the world of your con
ventional nation, and perhaps you expect me to either rise and explain,
or keep silent. Well, I will do neither. I will speak, but cannot fully
explain. Your paper is a worldly forum, a sort of court. In it there
is neither place nor credence for explanations which must include
psychic things, facts, and laws, as well as facts and circumstances of
the ordinary sort. Were I to explain in full, no one would believe me
save those students of the occult and the psychical who know psychic
law and fact. Those who doubt and wish all to be reduced to the
level of compass and square, of eye and word of mouth, would still be
doubters. Nothing would be gained at all. That difficulty no
intelligent person who has had psychic experience can overlook.' That
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
133
is why you are quite safe from a suit for libel. I assure you that had-.
you published something not so inextricably tangled up with psychic
phenomena I should be glad to have you in court, not to soothe
wounded feelings I have not, but to show that our faulty law and so- .
called justice do sometimes right some wrongs.
L?t me first emphatically deny the inference and assertion made by .
you, that I and my friends make money out of the T.S., or that the
organisation has built up something by which we profit. This is untrue,
and its untruth is known to all persons who know anything at all about the
society. No salaries are paid to our officers. We support ourselves
or privately support each other. I have never had a penny from the
society, and do not want any. The little magazine, the Pathy which I.
publish here in the interest of the society, is not supported by subscrip
tions from members, but largely by others, and it is kept up at a loss to
me which will never be repaid. I publish it because I wish to, and not
for gain. Thousands of dollars are expended in the T.S. work here
each year over and above what is paid in for fees and dues. The dues are
but four shillings a year, and three times as much as that is expended in
the work. Where does it come from ? Out of our private pockets,
and if I had a million I would spend it that way. My friends and
myself give our money and our time to the society without hope or.
desire for any return. We may be fanatics—probably are—but it is
false and malicious to accuse us of using the society for gain. The
only payment we get is the seeing every day thè wider and wider
spread of Theosophical theories of life, man, and nature. I am ready
to submit all our books and vouchers to any auditor to support these
statements. And you were in a position to find out the facts as I have
given them.
It is also absolutely untrue, as you attempt to show or infer, that
the society grows by talking of the Mahatmas or Masters, or by
having messages sent round from them. The movement here and
elsewhere is pushed along the line of philosophy, and each one is left
to decide for himself on the question of the Mahatmas. “ Messages from
the Masters ” do not go flying round, and the society does not flourish
by any belief in those being promulgated. Nor am I, as you hint, in
�124
ZSIS VEBY MUCH UNVEILED.
the habit of sending such messages about the society, nor of
influencing the course of affairs by using any such thing. Send out
and ask all the members and you will find I am correct. It is true that
those Masters tell me personally what I am to do, and what is the best
course to take, as they have in respect to this very letter, but that is'
solely my own affair. Could I be such a fool as to tell all others to go
by what I get for my own guidance, knowing how weak, suspicious,
and malicious is the human nature of to-day ? You are on the wrong
tack, my friend.
‘ But you were right when you say that Mrs. Besant made a remark
able change in respect to me. That is true, and Mr. Chakravarti whom
you name is, as you correctly say, the person who is responsible for it.
Before she met Chakravarti she would not have dreamed of prosecuting
me. This is a matter of regret, but while so, I fail to see how you aid
your case against me by dragging the thing in thus publicly, unless, in
deed, you intend to accuse him and her of going into a conspiracy
against me.
There are two classes of “ messages from the Masters ” charged to
me by you and by that small section of theT.S. members who thought
of trying me. One class consists of notes on letters of mine to various
persons; the other of messages handed to Mrs. Besant and Colonel
Olcott and enclosure found in a letter to Colonel Olcott from a man in
California.
I have never denied that I gave Mrs. Besant messages from the
Masters. I did so. They were from the Masters. She admits that,
but simply takes on herself to say that the Master did not personally
write or precipitate them. According to herself, then, she got from
me genuine messages from the Masters ; but she says she did not
like them to be done or made in some form that she at first
thought they were not in. I have not admitted her contention ; I have
simply said they were from the Master, and that is all I now say,
for I will not tell how or by what means they were produced. The
objective form in which such a message is of no consequence.
Let it be written by your Mr. Garrett, or drop out of the misty air, or
come with a clap of thunder. All that makes no difference save to
�ISIS' VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
125
the vulgar and the ignorant. The reality of the message is to be
tested by other means. If you have not those means you are quite
at sea as to the whole thing. And all this I thought was common
knowledge in the Theosophical world. It has long been published and
explained.
One of those messages to Mrs. Besant told her not to go to India
that year. I got it in California, and then telegraphed it to her in
substance later, sending the paper. I had no interest in not having
her go to India, but knew she would go later. The other messages
were of a personal nature. They were all true and good. At the
time I gave them to her I did not say anything. That I never
denied. It was not thought by me necessary to insult a woman of
her intellectual ability, who had read all about these things, by
explaining all she was supposed to know. Those who think those
messages were not from the Master are welcome to doubt it so far as I
am concerned, for I know the naturalness of that doubt.
When Colonel Olcott resigned 1 was first wiling to let him stay
resigned. But I was soon directed by another “ message ” to prevent
it if I could, and at once cabled that to him, and went to work to have
the American Section vote asking him to stay in office. As I was the
person mentioned to succeed him, we also, to provide for contingencies,
resolved that the choice of America was myself as successor. But
when he revoked, then my successorship was null and void until
voted on at another period not yet reached.
But it is absolutely false
that I sent an emissary to him when I found he was minded to stay in
office. Ask him on this and see what he says. I leave that to him. Truly
enough I made an error of judgment in not telling the influential
London members of my message when I told Olcott. But what of that ?
I did not tell the Americans, but left their action to the dictates of
■their sense and the trend of friendship and loyalty to our standardbearer.
The English voted against Olcott by doing nothing, but I
asked them in the same way as I asked the Americans to request him
to revoke. They had their chance. As India had done the same as
America I saw the vote was final as my message directed, and so . I
dropped it from my mind—one of my peculiarities. I certainly did
�I2Ó
ISIS
VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
not use any pressure by way of “ messages from the Masters ” on any
one as to that, save on Olcott. And he reported a message to the
same effect to himself. Did I invent that also ? My message to him
was copied by me on my type-writer and sent to him.
I did it thus
because I knew of spies about Olcott, of whom I had warned him to
little effect. One of those confessed and committed suicide, and the
other was found out.
A message was found in a letter from Abbot Clark, a Californian,
to Colonel Olcott. This, you say, I made and put in the letter. I
have the affirmation of Mr. Clark on the matter, which I send you
herewith to be inserted at this place if you wish. It does not bear out
your contention, but shows the contrary. It also shows that his letter
to Colonel Olcott was opened in India by some other person before
being sent on to Colonel Olcott. You can make what inference you
like from this.
Your statement about putting a question in a cabinet for an answer
when I stayed in the room and Mrs. Besant went out is false. No such
thing took place. I deny that there was any such thing as a reception
of “ answers in a sealed envelope in a closed drawer.” That is supreme
bosh from beginning to end, and cannot be proved by anybody’s testi
mony, unless you will accept perjury.
At the same time I can now say, as the sole authority on the
point, that several of the contested messages are genuine ones,
no matter what all and every person, Theosophist or not, may say to
the contrary.
You have much talk about what you say is called the Master’s
seal. You have proved by the aid of Colonel Olcott that the latter
made an imitation in brass of the signature of the Master and gave it
to H.P.B. as a joke.
You trace it to her and there you leave it, and
then you think I am obliged to prove I did not get it, to prove nega
tives again, when it has never been proved that I had it. I have long
ago denied all knowledge of Master’s seal either genuine or imitated. I
do not know if he has a seal; if he has, I have not yet been informed
of it; the question of a seal owned by him as well as what is his
writing or signature are both still beclouded. None of the members
who have been in this recent trouble know what is the writing, or the
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
127
seal, or the mark of the Master. It was long ago told by H.P.B. that
the so-called writing of the Master was only an assumed hand, and no
real knowledge is at hand as to his having a seal. I have seen impres
sions similar to what you have reproduced, but it is of no consequence
to me. If there were a million impressions of seals on a message
said to be from the Master, it would add nothing to the message in
my eyes, as other means must be employed for discovering what is and
what is not a genuine message. Seals and ciphers do not validate
these things. Unless I can see for myself by my inner senses that
a message is genuine, I will not believe it, be it loaded with
seals I do not know. As I know the thousand and one magical ways
by which impressions of things may be put on paper, even uncon
sciously to the human channel or focus, I have relied, and ask others to
rely, on their own inner knowledge and not to trust to appearances.
Others may think these little decorations of importance, but I do not.
I never asked anyone at any meeting, private or public, to note or
observe the seal-impression you give. Others may have done so, but I
did not. Others may have gone into laboured arguments to show the
value of such a thing, but I did not. The whole matter of this socalled seal is so absurd and childish that it has made me laugh each
time I have thought of it.
Now I can do no more than deny, as I hereby do absolutely, all the
charges you have been the means of repeating against me. I have
denied them very many times, for I have known of them for about two
years and a half. My denial is of no value to you ; nor to those who think
there is no supersensual world ; nor to those who think that because
conjurors can imitate any psychical phenomenon, therefore the latter
has no existence ; nor to those who deny the possibility of the existence
of Mahatmas or great souls. These things are all foolishness to su~h
persons, and 1 am willing to let it stay that way. Were 1 to go into all
the details of all the messages you refer to, and were I to get' from
those who know, as I can, the full relation of all that is involved in
those messages on my letters which I saw after the July “ investiga
tion ” was ended, I would be opening the private doors to the secret
hearts of others, and that I will not do. Already ! know by .means
�128
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
not. generally accessible altogether too much of the private hearts of
many of these people, and have no desire to know more.
Some of the matters you cite are related to a private body, once
called the Esoteric Section, which is. protected—nominally, so it
seems, among your informants—by a pledge. The breaking of that
by others gives me no right to add to their breach. I cannot, like
Mr. Old and others more prominent, violate the confidences of others.
His revelations cannot be analysed.by me in public. He is in the
position of those Masons who have attempted to reveal the secrets of
Masonry ; and either the public has listened to a liar or to one who
has to admit that he does not regard his solemn obligation as worth
a straw when it obstructs his purposes; in either case the information
cannot be relied upon.
His account and yours contain so many
misrepresentations that none [of] it has any serious consideration
from me.
And Mr. Old’s revelations, or those of any other members, amount
to nothing. The real secrets have not been revealed, for they have
not been put in the hands of such people ; they have been given only
to those who have shown through long trial and much labour that they
are worthy to have the full relation of the plans of the master-builder
exposed to their gaze. Let the dishonest, the perjured, and the vacil
lating go on with their revelations ; they will hurt no one but them
selves.
Now as to the Investigation at which you have laughed. I grant
you it was matter for laughter from outside to see such a lot of labour
and gathering from the lour quarters to end in what you regard as
smoke. Now, my dear sir, I did not call the Inquiry Committee. I
protested against it and said from the beginning it should never have
been called at all. Must I bear the brunt of that which I did not do ?
Must I explain all my life to a committee which had no right to come
together, for which there was no legal basis ? It was called in order
to make me give up an official succession I did not have ; months before
it met I said it would come to nothing but a declaration written by
me of the non-dogmatic character of the T.S. My Master so told me
and so it turned out. Will you give me no credit for this foreknowledge?
�ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED,
129
Was it a guess, or was it great ability, or did it come about through
bribery, or what ? I was told to use the opportunity to procure an
official declaration that belief in Mahatmas or Masters was not and is
not one of the T.S., and I succeeded in so doing. I might have been
accused as an individual and not official member. But by the influence
of the Mr. Chakravarti whom you mention the whole power of the
society was moved against me, so as to try and cut me down root and
branch officially and privately, so that it might thereby be made sure
that I was not successor to the presidency. This is the fact. That is
why I forgave them all; for it is easy to forgive; in advance I
forgave them since they furnished such a splendid official
opportunity for a decision we long had needed. The odium resulting
from the attempt to try occult and psychical questions under common
law rules I am strong enough to bear; and up to date I have had a
large share of that.
I refused a committee of honour, they say. I refused the committee
that was offered as it was not of persons who could judge the matter
rightly. They would have reached no conclusion save the one I now
promulgate, which is, that the public proof regarding my real or delusive
communications from the Masters begins and ends with myself, and
that the committee could not make any decision at all, but would have to
leave all members to judge for themselves. To arrive officially at this
I would have to put many persons in positions that they could not
stand, and the result then would have been that far more bad feeling
would come to the surface. I have at least learned after twenty years
that it is fruitless to ask judges who have no psychic development to
y.ettle questions the one half of which are in the unseen realm of the
soul where the common law of England cannot penetrate.
The “ messages from the Masters ” have not ceased. They go on
all the time for those who are able and fit to have them, but no more
to the doubter and the suspicious. Even as I write they have gone to
some, and in relation to this very affair, and in relation to other
revelations and pledge-breakings. It is a fact in experience to me,
and to friends of mine who have not had messages from me, that the
Masters exist and have to do with the affairs of the world and the
�130
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
Theosophical movement. No amount of argument or Maskelyneish’
explanation will drive out that knowledge. It will tear all the assaults
of time and foolish men. And the only basis on which I can place
the claim of communication by the Masters to me, so far as the world
is concerned, is my life and acts. If those for the last twenty years,
go to prove that I cannot be in communication with such beings, then
all I may say one way or the other must go for naught.
Why so many educated Englishmen reject the doctrine of the.
perfectibility of man, illustrated by the fact of there now existing
Masters of wisdom, passes my comprehension, unless it be true, as
seems probable, that centuries of slavery to the abominable idea of
original sin as taught by theology (and not by Jesus) has reduced them
all to the level of those who, being sure they will be damned any way,
are certain they cannot rise to a higher level, or unless the great god
of conventionality has them firmly in his grasp. I would rather
think myself a potential god and try to be, as Jesus commanded,
“ perfect as the Father in heaven ”—which is impossible unless in us is
that Father in essence—than to remain darkened and enslaved by the
doctrine of inherent original wickedness which demands a substitute
for my salvation. And it seems nobler to believe in that perfectibility
and possible rise to the state of the Masters than to see with science
but two possible ends for all our toil: one to be frozen up at last, and
the other to be burned up, when the sun either goes out or pulls us
into his flaming breast.—Yours truly,
William Q. Judge.
[The following is the “ affirmation ” of Mr. Abbot Clark, enclosed
with the above]:—
“San Francisco, Cal., April 21, 1894.
“ I, Abbot Clark, a member of the Theosophical Society, do hereby
state and affirm as follows: I have seen it stated in the newspapers
that it is charged that I wrote Colonel H. S. Olcott in 1891 to
India, and that in that letter was some message not known to me.
and that Colonel Olcott replied, asking where William Q.
Judge was at the time, and that I replied he was in my house,
The facts are: That in 1891 W. Q. Judge was lecturing in
�ISIS VERY MUCH CNVElLElJ.
this State, and I was with him at Santa Ana, and that I . had
no house and never had, being too poor to have one. Brother Judge
stopped at the hotel in Santa Ana, where he came from my home, m.y
father’s house at Orange, where he had been at dinner, and at Santa
Ana I arranged his lectures and I stayed at my aunt’s at Santa Ana;
while in the hotel a qonversation arose with us, in which I spoke of
Theosophical propaganda among the Chinese on this coast, and Brother
Judge suggested that I write to Colonel Olcott, as he knew many
BuddhistsTheosophists, and might arrange it better than Brother Judge;
and I then myself wrote to Colonel Olcott on the matter, showing
the letter after it was done to Brother Judge to see if it should be
improved or altered, and he banded me back the letter at once. I put
it in my pocket and kept it there for several days waiting for a chance
to'buy stamps for postage as I was away from any post-office. Brother
Judge left by himself the morning after I wrote the letter and went to
San Diego, and the only time I saw him again was in the train just to
speak to him on his return after about four days, and the letter was
not mentioned, thought of, nor referred to.
“ I assert on my word of honour that Brother Judge said nothing
to me about any message pretended to be from Masters or otherwise,
and so far as any reports or statements have been made relating to me
herein different from the above they are absolutely false.
“ From India I got a reply from Adyar T.S. office from one Charlu,
saying he had opened my letter in Colonel Olcott’s absence, and had for
warded it to him; andDharmapala told me he had seen letters from me to
Colonel Olcott on the matter received in India away from Adyar.
The said Charlu, in reply, also asked me where Brother Judge was when
the letter was written, and I wrote that he had been at my house
on that date, which is true as above stated, Orange being only
three miles from Santa Ana, as I thought Charlu wished to
have Brother Judge’s dates. But I thought also the questions
put were peculiar from such a distance. I never got any reply to
my sincere first question in that letter about propaganda from him,
and never any reply of any sort from Colonel Olcott. When Dharmapala
was here he did not bring any message in reply from Colonel Olcott,
�132
ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED.
but referred to recollecting speaking with Olcott about a proposal from
California to work with the Chinese. And Charlu did not speak of
any enclosure in said letter. A year later I again wrote on the same
matter to Colonel Olcott, which was answered by Gopala Charlu, now
dead, saying but little, if anything, would be done by him. To all
this I affirm on my honour.
“Abbot B Clark
“ Witness : signatures :
“Allen Griffiths, E. B. Rambo.”
�MR. LILLIE’S BOOKS ON THEOSOPHICAL SUBJECTS
To be published at once, price
'MADAME BLAVATSKY
6s.
THEOSOPHY
An Expose of Modern Theosophy, with an Appendix on the facts of the recent
Expose by THE WESTMINSTER GAZETTE.
Crown 8vo, cloth, neat, 6s.
DERN MYSTICS AND MODERN MAGIC.
Containing
a Full Biography of the Rev. WM. STAINTON MOSES, together with sketches of
Swedenborg, Boehme, Mme. Guyon, the Illuminati, the Kabbalists, the Theosophists,
the French Spiritists, the Society of Psychic Research, &c. •
THE INFLUENCE OF BUDDHISM ON PRIMITIVE
CHRISTIANITY. Crown 8vo, cloth, 2s. 6d.
‘‘Not content with pointing-/,,','
we 11-known coincidences between Buddhism
for them. TW
is imposing and ingenious.”—
SWAN SONNENSCHEIN, & CO., London.
By
NERO.
HORATIO
HUNT.^I
Send 5s. 6d. for the above Work, enclosing
Photo or Lock of Hair, and you will receive a
Delineation of your Life and Character.
Address: 113, EDGWARE-ROAD,
HYDE PARK, LONDON, W.
OUIJA.
THE CELEBRATED EGYPTIAN TALKING
BOARD.
Recommended by the
Star
and Review of Reviews.
4 6 and 6/6 post free. .
FRETWORK OUTFITS 1/9, 2/9, 3/9 post free.
BAMBOO CARVING MATERIALS®!
LUND, 70, MANNINGHAM LANE,
________ *
BRADFORD.________________
HAVE YOU READ
MORSE’S SPIRITUAL
LENDING LIBRARY,
s6, OSNABURGH ST., Regent’s Park,
ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION :
Ten Shillings and Sixpence.
One of the best Collections of Works on Spiritualism
and kindred topics.
Reading-room for Subscribers, with all the
Spiritual Periodicals, etc., from all parts of the
world. Open daily.
■ Full Catalogue Post Free on Application
from the Librarian,
FLORENCE MORSE.
IBSENS ‘BRAND.’
/«lEnglish ffrse by F, E. GARRETT.
The New Volume of the Cameo Series.
Demy 12mo, half-bound paper boards, front., 3s. 6d.
—Also an Edition limited to 250 copies, printed on
hand-made paper, bound in half-parchment, and num
bered and signed, price 10s. 6d. each net.
London : T. FISHER UNW 1N, Paternoster-sq.,E.Q
TWENTIETH THOUSAND. Now ready. Pricels. ;
by postls.2d. Also an Edition bound in Cloth, 2s.6d.
DR.CAROLUS-. Physician,” THE DOLLY DIALOGUES.
By ANTHONY HOPE.
and thereby made the acquaintance of a real
living Mahatma? If not, do so at once, and thus
become a.u courant with the New Religion, and the
most powerful arguments against Marriage ever
ublished.
t can be obtained cn and after Dec. 20, post free
from, and only from, the PSYCHIC PRESS
’SHING COMPANY, No. 7b, Central
South Castle Street, Liverpool.
Author of “ The Prisoner of Zenda” "Mr. Witfs
Widow," “ 11 alf a Hero,” &rc.
Reprinted
from THE
WESTMINSTER
GAZETTE, with Illustrations by A. Rackham.
“WESTMINSTER
GAZETTE”
OFFICE,
Tudor-street, E.C., and SIMPKIN, MARSHALL,
and Co., London, E.C.
�Gazette
lon&on
The Westminster Gazette,” Tudor Street, Blackfriart, E.O
Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton, Kent 4 Co, Limited E.C.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Isis very much unveiled : being the story of the great Mahatma hoax
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Garrett, Fydell Edmund [1865-1907]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: ii, 132 p. : ill. (ports., facsims.) ; 19 cm.
Notes: Stamp on leaf before title page: 'A. Bonner, 23 Streathbourne Road, Upper Tooting, London, S.W.' "Mr Lillie's books on theosophical subjects" (Swan Sonnenschein) and other publications listed inside back cover. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Westminster Gazette
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[n.d.]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N278
Subject
The topic of the resource
Theosophy
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Isis very much unveiled : being the story of the great Mahatma hoax), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky
NSS
Theosophy
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/92c519bee98aed5fa0ed67e0293b5c51.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ig3ydc%7EvET%7E%7E0IRTYJpP6ieyaqatlgtuJP0CW8m7lR8lQf16u%7EJ0eyUlywX4hsIdzN2e4xrE2-ywLB1k4x7d5xdFu4v3FgpWeIiq18U-cutNUyhUFYth%7EE%7Ed32EhXbZTLn15fgwAzjsly5Lu5HVJxEGmNZV8DrbMDCyKVkqhCC9b%7EzIHWQqkF5JTcbjKzxY1fUz2JKDMZKn76-qh%7Eo2R2NkMVFHbxggZB7fgedkF7nlpKrmeWFgJcAMAMIFOt1kdVRBlKpVOXcUupaFf2L-iM4aThIqxfqrug-1djX4tvZYgO3aTLGrptJ%7Ejl9rsfyJW9zqCz7qT2DFWn%7E4K0Rk3XA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
92a637b8785d58ba977567c48a80f82c
PDF Text
Text
National secular sor—v
MRS. BESANT’S
THEOSOPHY
BY
G. W. FOOTE.
Price Twopence.
LONDON:
PROGRESSIVE PUBLISHING COMPANY,
28 Stonecutter Street, E.C.
1889.
�MRS. BESANT’S THEOSOPHY.
For a considerable time I have seen that Mrs. Besant
was gradually drifting away from Secularism. I said
nothing, because I had no right to, nor would it have
been useful to do so. I was not in her confidence, so
that I could not speak with her on the subject ; and
my conviction of the change which was coming over
her was not grounded on anything that could be laid
before the public ; it was forced upon me by a hundred
indications, as though a hundred fingers, at different
times and places, all pointed in the same direction.
This conviction filled me with pain for many reasons.
I admired Mrs. Besant’s eloquence and abilities, and
still more her generous and enthusiastic character.
These are naturally of great service to whatever cause
she espouses. She was also a woman, and that fact
weighed even more heavily. There is no other lady of
the first rank on the Freethought platform, and in the
present transition state of society women are the best
missionaries. Until both sexes take an equal part in
public affairs, and in the promotion of principles, and
while audiences chiefly consist of men, a lady speaker
will exercise an influence quite out of proportion to
her intellect and information ; for difference of sex
tells unconsciously, and from the lips of a woman,
especially if young or engaging, even commonplaces are
apt to pass with men as revelations, and faulty logic is
wonderfully convincing.
Buc what I most admired in Mrs. Besant was her
courage. I regard this as the supreme virtue, and by
no means a simple one, for it includes many high
qualities. Mrs. Besant is a brave as well as a good woman.
I have special reasons for saying so, and the writing of
this pamphlet is one of the most painful duties I have
ever undertaken. Much
I respect Mrs. Besant, I
�Mrs. Betant’s Theosophy.
3
have a higher respect for truth ; much as I regard her
feelings, I have a deeper regard for the interests of
the Freethought party. There are times, and this is one
of them, when persons must yield to principles ; and
in such cases it is both honest and merciful to speak
with the utmost plainness.
Although the change I observed in Mrs. Besant gave
me pain, I will now say that it gave me no surprise.
Among all her fine qualities she has not the gift of origi
nality. She seems to me very much at the mercy of her
emotions, and especially at the mercy of her latest friends.
A powerful engine, she runs upon lines laid down for her.
Only on this theory can I account for the suddenness
of her changes. Nothing could exceed the vehemence
with which she attacked Socialism and Socialists after
the Bradlaugh-Hvndman debate, but what a brief time
elapsed before she was a thorough convert to what she
so denounced I Still more sudden is her latest revo
lution. The news fell upon the Freethought party
like a bolt from the blue. Without a word of warning,
without a public sign of change, Mrs. Besant printed
an article in the National Reformer, which, while it
puzzled most of its readers, showed them conclusively
that she had renounced the greater part of her previous
teaching. There was apparently no gradation in the
change. At one leap she left Atheism and materialism
and plunged into the depths of the wildest Pantheism
and spiritualism. Reviewing anonymously Madame
Blavatsky’s “ Secret Doctrine ” in the Pall Mall Gazette
of April 25, she concluded by saying “ Of the truth in it
our superficial examination is insufficient to decide.”
Yet in less than six weeks—or two months at the out
side—she was a Fellow of the Theosophical Society I
Surely no intellect like Mrs. Besant’s could undergo
such rapid changes by itself. Madame Blavatsky on
the one side, and Mr. Herbert Burrows on the other,
may supply the explanation.
Mrs. Besant said nothing on this subject at the
National Secular Society’s Conference on June 9,
although she must have contemplated, and perhaps,
written, her Theosophical article in Lucifer. Appa
rently she did not even take Mr. Bradlaugh into her
�4
Mrs. Besant’s Theosophy.
confidence. He speaks of her conversion to Theosophy
as wrought “ with somewhat of suddenness, and with
out any interchange of ideas with myself.”*
I must also express my opinion that Mrs. Besant has
treated the Freethought party very cavalierly. Men
and women with whom she had worked so long were
entitled to an explanation. Those she had for years
misled, if her new opinions were true, were even
entitled to hear her regret the misfortune. But she
recognised no such obligation. “ It is not possible,”
she simply said, “ for me here to state fully my reasons
for joining the Theosophical Society.”! Yet only a
few days afterwards she wrote “ Why I Became a
Theosophist ” in the Star.
I turned to this article with eagerness ; I read it
with disappointment. The “ Why ” .was a complete
misnomer. Mrs. Besant afforded not the slightest ex
planation. I do not want her to tell me what Theo
sophy is—for that is all she does, and very inadequately,
in the Star article. I do not want her to restate as
though they were true, positions she formerly assailed
as false. Both parties know there is an inside and an
outside of every position. I want to|know why Mrs.
Besant passed over from one side to the other. All she
does is to show me a map.
Suppose, for instance, I went over to Christianity.
Would it explain why /believed in the Resurrection if
I put forward the stock arguments in its favor ? My
friends would be entitled to know what change had
taken place in me. They would expect to be informed
why an argument once looked false and now looks true.
Was something overlooked? Has a new light fallen
upon the subject ? These are questions demanding an
answer, and they might be answered honestly even if
unsatisfactorily.
Amidst all her changes Mrs. Besant remains quite
positive. It does not occur to her that a person who has
been mistaken once may be mistaken twice or thrice.
The fact that she held one thing yesterday, and holds
the opposite to-day, does not shake her self-assurance.
* National Reformer, June 30, 1889 (p. 409).
t Ibid
�Mrs. Besant’s Theosophy.
o
She does not pause and let time decide whether her
new views are permanent. Previous mistakes do not
suggest hesitation and self-mistrust. Every time she
changes her course she asks others to follow her with
perfect confidence.
It is unpleasant to write thus, and I would hold my
hand if I were not apprehensive that Mrs. Besant
might lead Freethinkers astray. Her procedure on her
conversion'to Socialism was a warning. She used the
Freethought platform, as I think, in an unjustifiable
manner. Shethad not made it ; none of us made it;
it has been made by hundreds of workers through
more than one generation. Yet Mrs. Besant insisted
on using it to the uttermost for the ventilation of her
new views, on the principle, I suppose, that the end
justifies the means.
She advocated Socialism in
Secular halls, but not Secularism in Socialist meeting
places. I feel, therefore, the danger which now
threatens our party, and I speak out simply from a
desire to guard it, as far as I may, from this deadly
peril. If we are to have a Theosophical agitation
carried on in our midst there will be discord and
division; and I, for one, even at the risk of being mis
understood, or incurring Mrs. Besant’s enmity, prefer
to take time by the forelock on this occasion.
From the terms of her eulogy on Madame Blavatsky,
I infer that this lady is (at present) Mrs. Besant’s
guide, philosopher and friend. She takes Theosophy
on trust from “the most remarkable woman of her
time one\who asks for no reward but “ trust,” which
is what every mystery-monger starts with, and leads to
everything else ; one who has “ left home and country,
social position and wealth,” in order to bring us lessons
from “ the Wise Men of the East.”
Has Mrs. Besant made inquiry into these things, or
has she succumbed, body and soul, to the spell of the
sorceress ? Where is Madame Blavatsky’s home, what
is her country, what was her social position, and what
the extent of her wealth ? Many persons would like
these questions answered.^ Twenty years ago Madame
Blavatsky was practising as a spiritist “ mejum ” in
America. In 1872 she gave seances in Egypt. Three
�6
Mrs. Besa/nt’s Theosophy.
years later she started the Theosophical Society. In
India she was cordially welcomed, and many signs and
wonders attended her steps. None of them, it is true,
were of the slightest use to mankind. Cigarettes and
broken saucers played a leading part in the “ mani
festations.” The miracles were investigated on behalf
of the Society for Psychical Research by Mr. R. Hodg
son, who went out for the purpose, and reported them
as “ part of a huge fraudulent system.”* A fuller
exposure is the pamphlet by Madame Coulomb, one of
Madame Blavatsky’s friends.f This lady reveals the
whole mystery of sliding panels, hidden holes, and
secreted articles whose position was indicated by the
spirits who placed them there! The letters from
Madame Blavatsky to her chere amie are those of a
thorough-paced adventuress. She repudiated them as
forgeries, but she does not vindicate herself in the
law courts, and the letters certainly came from a more
clever and fertile brain than Madame Coulomb’s.
What has passed between Mrs. Besant and Mde.
Blavatsky I know not, nor am I anxious for informa
tion ; but the fact is public that the neophyte has been
greatly influenced by The Secret Doctrine, a bulky
work in two quarto volumes, containing nearly 1500
pages. An admirable review of this ponderous first
half of the new revelation has been written by my
colleague, Mr. J. M. Wheeler, whose knowledge of
Brahminism and Buddhism, as well as of general
“ occult ” literature, it would take Mrs. Besant many
years of close study to rival. For my own part, I
cannot say that I have read these volumes ; but I have
looked through them, and read some portions carefully.
Where it touches upon matters I am more or less
familiar with, the work seems a terrible jumble of
second-hand knowledge and first-hand pretence. How
ever Mrs. Besant could read some of it without a
guffaw at Mde. Blavatsky’s credulity, or disgust at her
arrogance, passes my comprehension. The mysterious
* Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, vol. iii., p. 210.
t Some Account of my Intercourse with Madame Blavatsky from
1872 to ISSp dy Madame Coulomb. London: Eliot Stock.
t Freethinker, July 14, 1889.
�Mrs. Besant’s Theosophy.
7
Book of Dzyan, which forms the basis of this revela
tion, and from which seven enigmatic stanzas are
translated as a sample, and as much as the feeble
Western intellect can stand at present, is boldly
declared to be of such antiquity that a later book, 5,000
years old, is juvenile in comparison. We are intro
duced to a Thibetan monastery, far away among hills
that no European foot has ever trodden, with sub
terranean galleries and halls containing books which
£ould not “ find room even in the British Museum.”
This mistress of Theosophy assures us that monsters
are still “ bred from human and animal parents,” and
refers us for proof to unspecified “ medical records.”
She denounces Darwinism, and will not hear of our
ape-like ancestry. Her theory of apes is that they are
the offspring of bestiality between men and animals !
The pineal gland is the atrophied “ third eye,” a fact
apparently not discovered by Theosophists until
scientific speculation had arisen on the subject. But
this third eye was really the first. Man had one eye
to begin with, somewhere at the top or the back of his
head ; the two eyes in front were developed after
wards, and the original optic atrophied away. But if
man had at first only one eye, he was compensated by
Having four arms. Such is the biological wisdom of
this amazing book!
Mde. Blavatsky banters the geologists smartly on
ffieir chronological differences. She could tell them
the true chronology “ an she would.” Meanwhile she
does something safer ; she reveals the chronology of
the future. The Americans are the founders of the
coming race. About 25,000 years hence they will
really begin business. Europe and the whole Aryan
race will be destroyed, and after “ many hundreds of
milleniums ” the Sixth-Root Race will be perfected.
Mde. Blavatsky and Prophet Baxter are in the same
line, but two of that trade never agree.
Natural Selection, we are told, is an exploded doc
trine. Haeckel, Huxley and Btichner, whom Mrs.
Besant has translated, are “ the intellectual and moral
murderers of future generations.” Haeckel, indeed, is
more than wicked ; he is “ idiotic.” Atheists and
�8
Mrs. Besant’s Theosophy.
materialists, if versed in anatomy, are “hopelessly
insane.” This statement, I presume, after Mrs. Besant’s
conversion, will be modified in any future edition.
Mde. Blavatsky speaks of the “materialised forms
which are sometimes seen oozing out of the bodies of
certain mediums.” This was a primeval mode of
sexless procreation, before the race fell into carnality,
and it “ cannot fail to be suggestive to the student.”
Indeed it cannot ! If Mrs. Besant has swallowed this
Wisdom of the East, it is no wonder that Mr. Bradlaugh
“looks to possible developments of her Theosophic
opinions with the very gravest misgiving.”
Leaving Mde. Blavatsky’s book for the present, I
come to what Mrs. Besant herself says about Thesophy.
In the first place it is Oriental. But that is not special,
for all our Western religions came from the East.
Many years ago Mrs. Besant rejected the Oriental
creed in which she was nurtured. She now accepts
another, and I fear just as blindly. Yet she thought
herself out of the first, and perhaps she will think
herself out of the second.
“ The Orient,” Mrs. Besant tells us, “begins to study
the universe just where the Occident ceases to study,”
which is a pretty way of saying that the Orient has an
insatiable appetite for metaphysics, while the Occident
has developed a taste for science and positive methods.
The result is that while the East is searching with the
patience of a million jackasses for hidden wisdom,
the West is master of scientific knowledge and practical
wisdom, and is thus able to rule the East with striking
facility. The grip of fact is the secret of mastery.
All this Eastern philosophy, except in some of its
ethical aspects, is like the German’s account of the
camel, developed from his inner consciousness. Only
the poverty of the human imagination prevents there
being a thousand different theories of the universe, past,
present, and to come, all equally sound, and all equally
hollow. That Theosophy, or Esoteric Buddhism, hangs
together, goes for nothing. Catholicism hangs together,
Calvinism hangs together, Swedenborg’s elaborate
mysticism hangs together; and for the same reason
that a drama, a novel, or a romance hangs together;
�Mrs. Besant’s Theosophy.
9
because the imagination has its laws as well as the
intellect, and construction is construction whether the
materials are fancies or facts.
Western positive philosophy discourages the spinning'
of systems, spider-like, out of ourselves. It deals with
the How, not with the Why, and takes its stand on the
relativity of knowledge. Every sentient being learnswhat it does learn by using its intelligence upon the
evidence of its senses. All knowledge, therefore, is
necessarily phenomenal. What noumena, or things in
themselves, may be, or whether they exist at all, are
idle and indifferent questions. Sugar is sweet, and if
we know nothing, and can know nothing of substance,
the sweetness is all the same.
Mrs. Besant has been satisfied with this philosophy
hitherto, but now she yearns for something higher.
She is impatient at the thought that “ the Why
ever eludes us,” that “causes remain enwrapped in
gloom.” She follows a vibration along a nerve until
she comes to a sensation in the brain. Formerly she
was satisfied with the phenomenal succession ; now
she asks for “ the causal link.” She admits that science
cannot give it ; and she might have added that since
the days of David Hume it has been obvious to experientialists that the “causal link” is a figment of
imagination. She regards its absence, or rather its
occultness, as a chasm and as a blank wall ; but the
latter metaphor has her preference, for she presently
sees Theosophy coming down (where from ?) as “ a
fairly long ladder,” and tries hex- “ luck at scaling it.”
I hope she will pardon me for leaving her there.
Scaling the Infinite is a pretty long climb. According
to a more commonplace metaphor, Mrs. Besant is trying
to get out of her own skin.
She admits as much, indeed, for the sublime investi
gation of causal links requires “ further mental equip
ment than that normally afforded by the human body.”
This is enough to daunt common people, but Mrs.
Besant introduces her “ Eastern sages ” who have
superior faculties, and can see through millstones and
into the middle of next week. They wield mysterious
powers “miraculous to the ordinary person.” Mrs.
�10
Mrs. Besant’t Theosophy.
Besant instances clairvoyance, mesmerism, and hypno
tism as abnormal faculties ; but clairvoyance has never
been established as a fact, and nothing has transpired
in mesmerism and hypnotism which goes beyond the
power the operator exerts through the patient’s
imagination.
These “ Eastern sages,” or Mahatmas, dwell on such
lofty planes of thought and power that, like men on
mountains, they have to be very careful what they
drop down. A big truth might floor us all, so they
dribble out a little at a time. “ Ultimately,” says Mrs.
Besant, “ in the course of myriad generations, the
whole race will reach this higher plane.” What an
elevation it must be ! Three hundred thousand years,
at least, must elapse before the mass of us will arrive
there! Theosophy cuts up the cake of Time in
remarkably big slices.
Some of the hidden wisdom of the Initiates, Adepts,
Arhats, Mahatmas, or Masters, has “ filtered out during
the last few years,” and here it is in The Secret
Doctrine. Mr. Wheeler describes it as “ a complete
hodge-podge of Yogi philosophy, Esoteric Buddhism,
Ignatius Donelly, Ragon and Eliphas Levi.” Mde.
Blavatsky is widely read in the barren literature of
occultism, has a good memory, a ready command of
her resources and a facile pen. But we look in vain
for method and lucidity. Dr. Tylor’s Primitive Culture
is a work of scientific genius ; Mde. Blavatsky’s Secret
Doctrine is the work of an accomplished charlatan.
Hidden wisdom is an easy thing to boast of. The
showman may enjoy a boundless reputation who is
never obliged to draw the curtain. Were the Adepts
to speak out, the world would see whether they are so
much wiser than Homer, JEscyhlus, Plato, Aristotle,
Virgil, Lucretius, Dante, Spinoza, Bacon and Shake
speare. The really great and wise men have poured
fourth their wisdom royally, like the sovereign sun
that sheds its glorious rays on all, leaving everything
to profit as it can.
As a matter of fact, except for its pretentious orient
alisms, there is nothing in Theosophy, as Mrs. Besant
has accepted it, which she could not have picked up
�Mrs. Besant’s Theosophy.
11
in the benighted West. That man’s Ego is immortal
is the current doctrine of Christendom. That Nature
is the manifestation of intelligence is taught almost
universally. Mesmerism is a commonplace of evening
entertainments Second-sight once abounded in the
Scotch highlands. Materialised spirit forms turn up
at ordinary seances. “ Mejums ” carry on daily commu
nication with the spirit world. The mystic number
seven flourishes in the Bible. Karma itself, with
out the doctrine of transmigration, is taught by
every great moralist; thoughts and deeds become habits,
■and habit is second nature.
Freethinkers will note the immense change in Mrs.
Besant’s views. She has “ no personal God,” but, “ the
universe is essentially Intelligence.” Matter is Maya,
illusion ; the Theosophist, like the Berkleyan idealist,
■“ seeks in the mental and spiritual planes of being the
causes of the material effects.” Mrs. Besant has turned
right about face ; and, once started on this new path,
there is no saying where she will go.
Besides her “ essentially Intelligence ” universe, or
perhaps I should say in it, Mrs. Besant has now a
multitude of “ intelligent beings ” other than mankind,
whose operations we mistake for “ the forces of nature.”
After death our Ego re-incarnates itself, again and again,
until it has purified itself from desire, when re-incarna
tion is no longer neccessary, and “ a man passes on to
higher planes of being.” Those who have thus passed
■on are a part of the “ intelligent beings ” aforesaid.
Spiritism, of course, is the logical issue of this fanci
ful philosophy. Theosophists seem all infected with
this melancholy superstition, which flourishes in gross
luxuriance among savages ; and it is to be feared that
Mrs. Besant will not escape the contagion.
Spiritism was not brought in by Theosophy, nor
was the doctrine of re-incarnation. Mrs Besant might
have learned it without the aid of Mde.' Blavatsky.
The transmigration of souls was a special feature of
the religion of ancient Egypt. It was taught by Plato.
It was received among the Jews ; witness Herod’s
exclamation about Jesus—“This is John the Baptist,
whom I beheaded.” The demons who took up their
�12
Mrs. Besant’s Theosophy.
abode in “ possessed ” persons were also supposed to be
the souls of deceased wicked men. Metempsychosis
was gravely satirised in the seventeenth century by Dr.
Donne in a remarkably learned and powerful poem.
The pre-existence of the soul, which is an aspect of
the same doctrine, is insisted on in Wordsworth’s
great Ode on Immortality, where the poet adopts Plato’s
doctrine of reminiscence. Tennyson refers to the
forgetfulness in one incarnation of our experience in
previous ones.
Some draught of Lethe doth await,
As old mythologies relate,
The slipping through from state to state.
These literary references are not recondite, and I cannot
help feeling surprised at Mrs. Besant’s being struck,
through the agency of the Theosophic sorceress, with
the charming novelty of very ancient doctrines.
Still less do I understand her deception as to the
sacred number seven, which is so frequent in Theoso
phy. Mrs. Besant accepts the “ sevenfold nature of
man ” from the Wise Men of the East through the
prophetess Blavatsky ; and, having swallowed one
seven, I suppose she will not scruple at the rest. This
seven business, like lunacy, comes from the moon.
Early men found out the lunar twenty-eight days ; they
halved that number and found fourteen ; they halved
this and found seven ; they tried to halve that and
failed. This indivisible number was also connected
with sexual periodicities, and thus it became mysterious
and sacred. This accounts for its constant recurrence
in religious systems.
According to Mde. Blavatsky “ the number of
Monads is necessarily finite and limited.” They
arrived on this earth (from somewhere) in emigrant
streams long ago, but in time this planet got stocked.
Mr. Sinnett indulges in an innocent speculation as to
their number. This is still undecided, though it is
agreed that the number is large enough to necessitate
an interval of centuries between one incarnation and
another. Mde. Blavatsky says “ many centuries.” Mr.
Sinnett says “ fifteen hundred years at least.” Theo
�Mrs. Besant’s Theosophy.
13
sophy, it appears, though, supernally wise, is rather
vague in its arithmetic.
A principal doctrine of Buddhism is Karma, and
this is a leading tenet of Theosophy. “ Karma,” Mrs.
Besant says, “ is the expression of eternal justice,
whereby each reaps exactly as he has sown. It is the
impersonal law of retribution, distributing the fruit of
good and bad actions. During one incarnation is
Wrought the Karma which shall mould the circum
stances of the next, so that each man beautifies or mars
his own future. None can escape from the operation
of Karma, nor modify it save by the creation of fresh.
Karma presides, so to speak, over each re-incarnation,
so that the Ego passes into such physical and mental
'©nvironment as it deserves.”
Thus the problem of evil no longer disturbs Mrs.
Besant. She now sees nothing but “ eternal justice.”
Karma, says Mde. Blavatsky, reconciles us to “ the
terrible and apparent injustice of life.” According to
Mr. Sinnett “ the great inequalities of life ” are per
fectly explained. Each of us gets exactly what he
deserves, aud grumblers should reflect that suffering
and degradation are simply “ a new way to pay old
debts.” The subtle Sinnett relaxes, however, in the
■case of accidents. Cripples, and children injured at
birth, are victims of those little disorders that will
happen in the best regulated families ; but there is
■consolation in the thought that “ the undeserved suffer
ing of one life is amply redressed under the operation
of the Karmic law in the next, or the next.” Beautiful!
“ Blessed are ye that mourn now, for ye shall be com
forted.”
How Mrs. Besant reconciles Karma with Socialism
I leave her to explain. I am not a devotee of Socialism
myself, but I respect its objects if I dissent from its
policy. But if each man “reaps exactly as he has
■sown,” if each Ego goes into “ such physical and mental
environment as it deserves,” the Socialist—and, indeed,
■.every social reformer—is fighting against Karma ;
while denunciation of landlords, capitalists, and all
privileged persons, is silly screaming against “ eternal
justice.” Thus, at least, it appears to me. But I do
�14
Mrs, Besant’s Theosophy.
not dogmatise ; I am open to learn ; and I will listen
to what answer Mrs. Besant brings me from the WiseMen of the East.
Theosophy, of course, like every other system, has
its moral aspects, and Mrs. Besant deems them super
latively beautiful. I do not share her admiration ; on
the contrary, I regard the ethics of Theosophy as
detestable.
Mrs. Besant gravely tells us that Altruism “ differen
tiates ” Theosophy from “ all other systems as though
disinterestedness and self-sacrifice were not heard of
before the gospel of Blavatsky ; as though, indeed, she
had not herself written a pamphlet on Auguste Comte,,
whose maxim was Vivre Pour Autrui—Live For
Others. Altruism has existed in every ethical system.
No sane person thinks of neglecting its august claims.
Religious systems, however, have a knack of carrying
everything to excess, and Theosophy is no exception to
the rule. Mrs. Besant is not satisfied with giving
society as well as the individual its rights. Self is not
only to be subordinated to the general good, it is “ to
be destroyed.” We must be “ wholly selfless,” we
must “ kill out all personal desires.” Could anything
be more grotesque ? Could anything be more perni
cious ? Such a philosophy, if carried out, would reduce
its devotees to the flabbiest sentimentality and the most
hopeless impotence. Fancy, for instance, the attempt
to perpetuate the race, not by sexual desire, but by
altruistic principles! It is individual passion that
moves us. Without it we should stagnate, decay, and
perish. Every individual is necessarily the centre of
his own world. The difference between good and bad
men is a question of circumference. How many are
included in the range of one’s sympathies ? The selfish
man includes few, the unselfish man many, the true
saint all. Even then the imagination, which again is
individual, interposes its limitations. Thus we are
profoundly moved by calamities at home, and read of
calamities in distant, and especially alien countries,
with scarcely a sigh.
We may liken the individual and the social instincts
to the centrifugal and centripetal forces which keep
�Mrs. Besant’s lheosophy.
15
the earth revolving in its orbit. Mrs. Besant would
abolish the centrifugal force and shoot the earth into
the sun. This magnificent imperialism may have its
charms, but the majority of sensible people prefer a
compromise in the shape of Home Bule.
“ Identifying the individual with the all ” is a finesounding phrase. The doctrine, however, is that of
ascetics in all ages and climes. As a mood it has its
value ; it is suicidal as a philosophy. The mystics who
cut themselves off from society, immured themselves
in cells or hermitages, sought for “ purification,”
trampled upon “ self,” and tried to extinguish all
“personal desire,” were identifying themselves with,
God. Theosophy substitutes “ the all ” for God, but it
is the same old process with a new name.
The final ethical developments of Theosophy are
suggested by Mrs. Besant, and they should be carefully
noted. Within the Theosophical Society there is an
“inner circle” of those who desire to enter on “the
Path.” For “obvious reasons” Mrs. Besant says little
about this doubly esoteric circle. The reasons may be
“ obvious ” to her, but twenty people, I venture to say,
would give twenty different guesses. However, we
must take what is vouchsafed. The inner circle, it
appears, must “ abstain from all intoxicants ”—not in
cluding Theosophy ; and “ the use of meat is dis
countenanced.” So far there is nothing very “ occult ”
in the prescription. Teetotalism is at least as old as
the Nazarites, and is a rule of Mohammedanism ; while
Vegetarianism, also a very ancient practice, is spreading
quite independently of Theosophy.
The third point is the critical one. Those who
mean to pursue the Path “ must lead a celibate life.”
That is the centre of gravity of all these “ spiritual,r
systems. The poor flesh is to be mortified, whipped,
and suppressed. The spirit is to be all in all. At a
single bound Mrs Besant reaches the sexual doctrine
of St. Paul. All her old teaching on this pc int is cast
to the winds. Page on page of her pamphlet on Mar
riage must be cancelled to bring it into conformity
with the new doctrine. Marriage is now a mere con
cession to human weakness. Celibacy is the counsel
�16
Mrs. Besant’s Theosophy.
of perfection. The sacred names of husband and wife,
father and mother, are to be deposed as usurpers. At
the very best they are only to be tolerated. It is idle
to reply that celibacy is only for the “ inner circle.”
If it be the loftiest rule of life, it should be aimed at
by all.
Celibacy is not the loftiest rule of life. Physically,
mentally, and morally, it is attended with the gravest
dangers. What it has led to in pietist circles is only
too well known. Turned out of doors, nature climbs
in at the window. The frustration of honest instinct
makes men and women flighty and feverish, or fills
them with the malaise of unsatisfied yearning. Dis
used functions avenge themselves, and the body
becomes a hospital or a churchyard of effete, vicious,
nr cadaverous organs.
Spiritism on the one side, and celibacy on the other,
are the evil angels of Theosophy. I will not venture
to speculate on where they may lead an ardent and
devoted nature like Mrs Besant’s. She is not an adven
turess, and is more likely to be the victim than the
mistress of this superstition. Others may be only
partially deluded, and sufficiently free to find influence
and profit in ministering to the credulity of their dupes.
But Mrs Besant is made of different stuff. She will go
on “ the Path ” with perfect confidence ; she will
preach and proselytise. What will be will be ; the
end I cannot foresee or avert. Yet I will cherish a
hope that a lady so gifted, so eloquent, so devoted, and
so brave, may some day see that Theosophy itself is
Maya, or illusion, and return to the sound and bracing
philosophy that once guided and inspired her.
Printed and Published by G. W. Foote, 28 Stonecutter Street, London, E.C.;
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Mrs Besant's theosophy
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Foote, G. W. (George William) [1850-1915]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 16 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Progressive Publishing Company
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1889
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N254
Subject
The topic of the resource
Theosophy
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Mrs Besant's theosophy), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Annie Besant
NSS
Theosophy
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/c9655754bce799f131a9e4da03ba08a8.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=cS2La78pJvrfCI7ZRjqtft9TgVsN%7EmFvlW7IJ6Lui9O%7EEYivM%7Ep5nlJfEwl9mEyU3ubWwatYxC4QuNfU26sfYfgWFR3k9yapy8dJaCRxA7V-rcFvqmHfxHWIl8y0Xyu2P4fh9hI-WPyQNcVJVYsvY8Ep1kKRqJAm%7EnYh0LfZMheWi%7EpLEUSmLM%7EDThIESGOBGe3L5XdGROxDpc8I9gGJr%7ErR9n4OgBTGnUlejSySczj-UessvQ8-ExdhfRFXwubFplAaPzW5Sy8YIT8iTRL-oTGL82YWtp2rGf2V%7ECFtjGj8P4AzdtZNcxnMUnMcHNrhhw8TFdctwz5uz1bSX2xNRg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
aef73bd82281a0b371c058b31d269d01
PDF Text
Text
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
SECULARISM
AND
THEOSOPHY
A Rejoinder to Mrs. B esani's pamphlet
BY
G. W. FOOTE.
PRICE
TWOPENCE.
bonbon :
PROGRESSIVE
PUBLISHING
COMPANY,
28 STONECUTTER STREET, E,0.
1889.
�SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY.
A REJOINDER TO MRS. BES ANT’S PAMPHLET.
MRS. Besant has at length discovered that she owes a
duty to the Secular party, and to all the persons she
has for many years been helping to mislead. The
obligation does not seem to have occurred to her until
I pointedly urged it in my pamphlet on Mrs. Besant's
Theosophy. But better late than never. Her recanta
tion and her fresh programme, minus some discreet
omissions, are placed before her old friends and
followers, and I now submit them to a fuller •
examination.
I must first, however, clear away some personal
matters. Mrs. Besant apparently pleads that her delay
in addressing the Secular party was necessitated. “ I
had no paper,” she says, “ in which I could give my
reasons for becoming a Theosophist.” True, but not
the whole truth. I cannot believe Mr. Bradlaugh
would have denied her space in the National
Reformer; I am certain I would not have denied her
space in the Freethinker. Even if the Freethought
papers were closed to her, there was still the alternative
of a pamphlet, and that she has now adopted.
Mrs. Besant complains that she has been misrepre
sented. I do not admit it ; but who was at fault if it
be true ? I took what she had written, and I could
not know what she had not written. She has only
herself to blame for any misunderstanding.
Curiously enough, she has only detected one “ mis
representation ” in my pamphlet, and that is no misrepresentation at all, as I shall show presently. The
other “ misrepresentations ” are discovered in the Free
thinker. I am rebuked for quoting a portion of a
�13^505
SECULARISM . AND THEOSOPHY.
3
review of my pamphlet in the Medium and Daybreak,
The fact is, I had not seen the paper itself, which was
not forwarded, but only the extracts I used, which
were copied and sent me by a friend. Mrs. Besant
quotes “the context,” but she only quotes as much as
serves her purpose. She indulges in the withering
but hackneyed remark that “ comment is needless.” I
agree with her. The matter is of infinitesimal import
ance. It is a speck of dust in comparison with such a
mistake, for instance, as the one about Krishna and
Christ in her Roots of Christianity; a mistake which
has been pointed out to her again and again, but which
I am not aware that she has taken the slightest pains to
correct, although it is a serious damage to the Freethought cause in controversy with the agents of the
Christian Evidence Society.
Another point is not worth the space it occupies.
It was stated in the Freethinker, on the authority of a
Theosophist, that Mde. Blavatsky was going abroad for
a holiday, and would confide the presidency of the
Society to Mrs. Besant. Now Mde. Blavatsky is “the
centre ” of the movement in England, as Mrs. Besant
wrote in the Star, but she is not the “ president.’
Theosophically the distinction is immense. The
Freethinker clearly circulated false news.
I plead
guilty. I put on sackcloth. I humble myself in the dust.
I am oppressed by the enormity of my crime. But if
every editor as guilty joined me, what a company we
should be.
It is a pity Mrs. Besant is so lacking in humor.
She seems to think her old colleagues are in a conspiracy
to insult her.
She complains of “ rebuke,” of
“ reproach,” of “ bigotry.” She apostrophises Truth,
and declares she will follow her “ into the wilderness.”
She even writes an epitaph for her martyr’s tomb.. All
this shows she is very much in earnest, but is it
pertinent, is it sensible ? Does criticism become
persecution when Mrs. Besant is its object ? Is no one
to tell her that her new opinions are false ? Is no one
to point out their incompatibility with Secularism ?
Is she to be treated as the spoilt child of Freethought ?
Must we applaud her passionate appeals to Truth and
�SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY.
never let her hear a little ? I protest that when any
one gets into this frame of mind a douche of plain
speaking is the only proper remedy. Theosophy is not
above criticism, neither is Mrs. Besant. She is free to
change her views as often as she pleases. She may
turn Roman Catholic if she likes. Freethinkers will
respect her motives and admire her eloquence. But
they will retain their right to criticise her religion as
theyT would any other, and to define where and how it
clashes with Secularism.
When Mrs. Besant says that I write “ with exceeding
bitterness,” I can only reply that I am not conscious of
doing so. I spoke of her as “ a brave as well as a good
woman.” I said I “ admired Mrs. Besant’s eloquence
and abilities, and still more her generous and enthusi
astic character.” Is this “ exceeding bitterness ” ? My
criticism is called the “ recent attack on me.” There
is the secret. Mrs. Besant has been humored and
fluttered so long that criticism is an “attack.’’
Still more absurd is the complaint that I “ warn her
off the platform.” “ I will cherish a hope,” I said,
“ that a lady so gifted, so eloquent, so devoted, and so
brave, may some dayT see that Theosophy itself is Maya,
or illusion, and return to the sound and bracing philo
sophy that once guided and inspired her.” This is not
warning her off the platform, but hoping she will
return to the platform she has virtually left.
I certainly did complain of Mrs. Besant’s having
used the Freethought platform “ in an unjustifiable
manner ” to propagate Socialism. I also remarked—
but this is judiciously avoided—that “ she advocated
Socialism in Secular halls, but not Secularism in
Socialist meeting-places.” Hundreds of Freethinkers
said the same thing, but it did not reach Mrs. Besant’s
ears. Well, it should, and it has. I fear she will never
forgive me for telling her, but truth is higher than
politeness, and I risk the consequences.
Mrs. Besant says that “ in myT younger and broader
days ” I lectured from the Freethought platform on
various subjects. She is mistaken. Let us take the
Hall of Science in London. Sunday evening lectures
are delivered there by the leaders of our party. That
�SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY,
5
is the Freethought platform. I have always recognised
it and acted accordingly. There are also Sunday
morning lectures during a few of the winter months.
That is not the Freethought platform. It is merely an
adjunct. Besides, the character of those lectures was
decided by Mr. Bradlaugh and Mrs. Besant. All I had
to do was to acquiesce. At any rate, the Secular party
was not committed to any views expressed on those
occasions ; nor could it be, for one Sunday Mr. Brad
laugh was lecturing against Socialism, and the next
Mrs. Besant was lecturing for it. But Mrs. Besant was
not satisfied with that. She took to lecturing in the
evening, and used the Freethought platform for a
foreign purpose. I do not expect her to agree with me,
but I say it was wrong. Her being a Socialist did not
conflict with her being a Secularist, but there is a time
and a place for everything, and a party organised for
one object will split up if it deals with twenty. As a
Freethinker, belonging to a party which teaches the
supreme value of liberty, I might (I apprehend) speak
from the platform against compulsory vaccination. But
the separate question of the medical character of vac
cination is an open one. Freethinkers may and do
differ upon it, and what right have I, or what right
has anyone, to use a platform maintained by all for
the regular advocacy of sectional views ? I might use
my position and my popularity, such as they are, to
carry my own way, as far as the party would stand it;
but in doing so I should be a traitor to the cause, I
should be setting myself above its welfare and its
traditions.
Again and again I have declined, as a special lec
turer of the National Secular Society, to speak against
Socialism. Some of our members were Socialists, and
I was bound to refrain from attacking their opinions
on our common platform. I have tried to carry out
the same policy in the Freethinker. It is a just and
a wise policy, and Mrs. Besant was thinking more of
Socialism than of Secularism when she violated it so
flagrantly.
Mrs. Besant’s position is untenable. She claims the
right of “ using the platform for lecturing on any sub
�6
SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY.
ject that seems to me to be useful.” What, on any
subject ? Crinolines, tall hats, and French pastry ?
Clearly any is too sweeping. Suppose Mrs. Besant
turned a Roman Catholic, or a Lutheran, or a Wesleyan,
or a Salvationist, would she still claim the right of
airing her views on the Freethought platform ? Again
any is too sweeping. There are necessary limitations,
and Mrs. Besant has not troubled to ascertain them.
Let me tell her what I believe her right is on the
Freethought platform. It is not a right to lecture on
any subject she thinks useful, but a right to lecture on
any subject the party thinks useful- To this com
plexion she must come at last.
Meanwhile Mrs. Besant forces upon me an unplea
sant duty. She will have no compromise, and no
accommodation, until the Secular party is stung into
taking action on the matter. She is going round the
country preaching Theosophy from our platform.
Very well, I shall go round and oppose it. I will
spare it no more than any other superstition. And she
has no reason to complain. She will do her duty, and
I will do mine. When the party decides, I will
submit or retire. That it must decide I have no doubt.
Foreign matter will sometimes enter an organism, but
the organism tries to expel it, and if strong enough it
succeeds. I am sure Freethought is strong enough,
and I believe this controversy will help to accentuate
its principles and define its policy.
Let me also tell Mrs. Besant why I said she might
“lead Freethinkers astray.” She protests that Free
thinkers are “ competent to form their own judgment,
not mere sheep, to be led one way or the other.”
Borrowing her own expression, I call this clap-trap.
Judgments are formed by hearing both sides. That is
one reason for my interference. Then there are Free
thinkers and Freethinkers. The best of us are human,
and many excellent persons have followed a trusted
leader into new paths, out of sheer love and admira
tion. When Mrs. Besant was so annoyed with Mr.
Ball’s pamphlet on her Socialism, when she denounced
it in the National Reformer as insulting, declining to
answer it on the ground of its scurrility, and refusing
�SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY.
7
her old contributor a word of explanation—I met
with one Freethinker whom she did lead astray. He
said he was sorry to hear that Mr. Ball had grossly
insulted Mrs. Besant, and on being asked if he had
read the pamphlet, replied “ Certainly not, I shouldn’t
think of doing so.” Here and there, then, a Free
thinker is a sheep, in certain moods ; and it is well
to protect these weaker brethren against their own
frailties.
Now for the single “ misrepresentation ” in my
pamphlet. I spoke of Mrs. Besant’s belief in the
“ transmigration of souls.” Upon this she remarks :
“ I can but suppose that he is moved rather by a desire
to discredit me than by a desire for truth ”—and this
from a lady who is herself so sensitive to criticism!
Was there no alternative but a dishonorable motive on
my part ? Mrs. Besant had not fully explained herself ;
I took what she offered, and paid her the compliment
of supposing she was logical. She believed in re
incarnation, and I thought she accepted its conse
quences, like the Brahmins and Buddhists, like the
ancient Egyptians, and indeed like every other people
among whom the doctrine has prevailed. If there is
ascent, there is also descent; if those who purify them
selves are reincarnated in higher forms, those who
degrade themselves are reincarnated in lower forms.
Such is the philosophy of reincarnation in ancient and
modern faiths. But Mrs. Besant does not “ believe in
the transmigration of souls, or that the human Ego can
enter a lower animal.” I accept the correction. I was
ignorant of what Mrs. Besant had not informed me.
I had not—and I said I had not—made a minute study
of the expensive publications of the Theosophical
Society. I now learn that this mushroom school, this
plagiarist of the great oriental faiths, sacrifices logic to
agreeableness, and puts a Western brand on its stolen
property from the East.
Mrs. Besant goes a great deal too far, however, in
speaking of “ an absurd statement ” in the Freethinker
“ about the souls of ill-behaving Hindu wives passing
into various animals,” as she is guilty of gross mis
representation in calling it “ a caricature of Theosophy.”
�SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY.
Theosophy was not so much as mentioned.
is the whole paragraph.
Here
“ Mrs. Besant goes in for the transmigration of souls. But
this doctrine is as useful to priests as the doctrine of heaven
and hell. Bombay girls have been taught in the Government
school that in the next life a wife who is cross with her
husband will become a village dog; the woman who eats
sweetmeats without sharing them with her husband’s relatives
will become a musk-rat living in filth. On the whole we think
hell is slightly preferable.” *
Calling this “ absurd ” does not dispose of it. It is a
fact. Surely Mrs. Besant is not ignorant that this kind
of thing is taught in the Hindu scriptures. I will give
her chapter and verse if she disputes it.
We will now take Mrs. Besant’s reasons for leaving
Atheism and Materialism ; then we will hear what she
says about Theosophy ; and finally we will see if her
new teaching is compatible with Secularism.
Mrs. Besant says she was satisfied with Atheism on
the negative side, but not on the positive side, for it
did not explain Life and Mind. But is Atheism called
upon to do so ? The origin of life is a question for
biologists. Should it never be cleared up our ignorance
will not prove there is a God. Nor is an Atheist com
pelled to be a material Monist. The late Professor
Clifford inclined to believe in matter-stuff and mind
stuff (not spirit stuff, which was all stuff), and he was
a thorough-going Atheist. But. waiving this, I will
ask Mrs. Besant a question. Why did she keep her
dissatisfaction with Atheism, on the positive side, so
carefully to herself ? I have looked through some of
her pamphlets without finding a hint in that direction.
I have spoken to friends who have frequently heard
her lecture (a pleasure necessarily denied to me), and
not one of them suspected the dissatisfaction she now
proclaims. To say the least, it is very unfortunate.
Atheism is now left for Pantheism, which I need
not attempt to argue against, no defence of it being
made. Mrs. Besant plainly says that her new “ theory
of the Universe ” is taken “ on the authority of certain
Freethinker, July 28, 1889, p. 298.
�SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY.
9
individuals,” the said individuals being the Wise Men
of the East, or rather their intermediaries like Mde.
Blavatsky. “ God is all and all is God.” This is the
new shibboleth. But Mrs. Besant is anxious to break
it gently to Atheists, so she tells them she has “ no
personal God.” This is cheating us with phrases.
If our Ego is spirit, and comes from the uni
versal spirit-fount, what makes our personality
must also make the infinite personality. I know the
subtle answers to this, but they make no impression
on me. The broad fact remains that non-miraculous
men and women cannot talk of God without a concep
tion of personality. The pronoun is always he or she,
and never it. There are expressions to satisfy any
Theist in Mde. Blavatsky’s Isis Unveiled. She speaks
of “the Universal Soul,” of “the one living God,”
and of “the Father Spirit.” So true it is that
God must necessarily be a magnified man.
With respect to Materialism, Mrs. Besant did more
than conceal her dissatisfaction. Only last year she
spoke of her individuality as a combination, and said
“ if the combination is destroyed I am destroyed.” She
ridiculed the notion that “ the forces of the soul, love,
memory, thought, could not perish with the bodily
dissolution, but must continue to exist somewhere.”
She laughed at Canon Liddon for talking of “ a dis
embodied spirit.”* If this is the language of doubt,
or even of suspense, I am very much deceived. It
seems to me the language of absolute conviction.
I have already, in my previous pamphlet, given my
opinion that the. “causal link” Mrs. Besant was
privately in search of is a mental figment. I deny that
Cause and Effect are external realities ; I assert that
they are subjective conceptions. There is no solution
of continuity in nature. We isolate phenomena in
thought for convenience, just as in the definition of a
line we isolate the idea of length. And as Cause and
Effect are subjective, the “ nexus ” is also subjective,
which is precisely what I have affirmed.
Whoever asks for the Why of nature is simply asking
* National Reformer, April 8, 1888.
�10
SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY.
for an anthropomorphic explanation.
The question
“ Why should it be so ? ” is answered by the question
“ Why should it not be so ? ” The solid fact remains
that it is so. We can learn the How of nature, and the
statement that there is anything else to learn is a sheer
assumption.
Oxygen and hydrogen exist together as free gases in
mechanical mixture. They are precipitated by elec
tricity into water. The two gases are now in chemical
combination, and we have a visible and palpable fluid.
A great change has taken place, but the process is ex
plained. Science is satisfied. But Mrs. Besant is not.
Besides the oxygen, hydrogen, and electricity, she
wants a fourth thing that made the other three
cooperate. That is, she is in the same position as the
metaphysicians who were satirised by Swift in his
“meat-roasting power of the meat-jack.”
Passing along the line of evolution we come to com
binations of increasing complexity, but all built up from
the same matter. No new substance is introduced.
The inorganic gradually becomes organic, differentia
tion follows differentiation, the law of continuity is
never broken, and finally we come to man. If we
study man separately he is unintelligible. He must be
studied in connexion with other living forms. His
nature is involved in his history, and his destiny in
his origin.
Man did not spring into existence as Minerva leapt
full-armed from the brain of Jove. He is the last of a
long line of ascending forms. All his faculties are
incipient, and some of them well developed, in lower
animals. Whatever difficulty there may be in explain
ing whij he thinks, must also be found in explaining
why animals think.
Mrs. Besant follows nerve vibrations till she comes
to a thought, and says “ Here is something fresh.” She
means, I presume, that there is a psychical and a physi
cal aspect of the complete process. What is objectively a
nerve vibration is subjectively a sensation or a thought.
That the two aspects are correlated is indisputable.
Now it is asserted that besides the body there is a
spirit. Mrs. Besant says that “ Body and Mind, how-
�SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY.
IT.
ever closely intermingled, are twain, not one.” But
she does not explain the absolute co-operation of two
dissimilar entities. If the body cannot think how can
the mind act? Why is it that mental and moral
phenomena appear so dependent on nervous activity ?
Leibniz was driven to the colossal joke of pre-estab
lished harmony. God arranged the bodily and spiritual
phenomena at the outset, so that they should always
go together without any real relation, like two different
clocks keeping exactly the same time!
Observe the extremities to which spiritualists are
reduced. Every theory must show a true cause : that
is, a cause which is not invented for the occasion, but
is capable of being demonstrated independently. Now
the spiritualist is asked to establish his cause. He says
it works through the body, and he is desired to show
that it exists and operates elsewhere.
The usual
answer is, “Wait till you are dead.” But a number of
level-headed people reply, “Well, if I must die before
I can learn, I won’t trouble myself about it till I am
dead.” Then another answer is made. The spiritists
say, “The spirit does manifest itself apart from the
body in this world.” Thus we have “ materialised
spirit forms ” in Spiritism, and “ astral appearances ”
in Theosophy. Mrs. Besant is driven by an inevitable
logic to declare that body and spirit “are not only
separable at death, but may be temporarily separated
during life, the intellectual part of man leaving the
body and its attached principles, and appearing apart
from them.” This belief was once almost universal,
but it dies away in the progress of civilisation. Up to
a certain point it is consistent with legal sanity
beyond that point it leads straight to the asylum.
Mrs. Besant presses hypnotism into her service, but
I confess I see nothing in it to support her theory.
Double consciousness and other abnormal processes
are being carefully studied, and sensible persons will
wait for the scientific explanation. It is simply idle
to base far-fetched theories on our temporary igno
rance.
I pass lightly over the calculating boy. He does
not upset my philosophy. As for the ignorant servant
�12
SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY.
girl who “ talks Hebrew in her sleep,” I suspect she is
the person I read of in Coleridge, who picked up
Hebrew sounds unconsciously in the service of a
learned parson. Shakespeare understood this well
enough, and made Ophelia sing a questionable song
in her madness, which she might have heard from the
lips of a loose-minded nurse.
Let me remind Mrs. Besant that Theosophy is not
Pantheism or Idealism. What she has to defend is its
speciality—the doctrines that differentiate it from other
systems. On these points, however, she condescends
to say very little.
She gives us the sevenfold division of man—Atma,
Buddhi, Manas, Kamarupa, Prana, Linga Sharira, and
Rupa. I was not conscious of all that cargo. I sus
pect I should laugh if it were not for the imposing
terminology. At any rate it is hardly worth discuss
ing. Nor, indeed, can it be discussed. No evidence
is offered ; the category is accepted from the Wise Men
of the East.
Only one proof is offered of re-incarnation. We are
told that Hofmann, the infant prodigy of music, acquired
his faculties and knowledge in a previous existence.
But why Hofmann ? Mozart was a far greater prodigy.
Both of them were the offspring of professional
musicians, and the law of heredity is a sufficient ex
planation. It would be more to the purpose if Hof
mann had been born among the Hottentots.
Mrs. Besant forgets her own principles, or she would
see that the Hofmann’s case is not explained by rein
carnation. Waiving the fact that faculty is not acquired
individually, I inquire of the Theosophists how long
a period of Devachan intervenes between successive
incarnations. Mr. Sinnett says it may be “ thousands
of years,”* while 1,500 years is the very lowest
estimate.f Mde. Blavatsky says “ many centuries.” Now
if Hofmann’s previous incarnation was only “ many
•centuries ” ago, how did he acquire a musical know
ledge which was then impossible ? Harmonic music
is little more than three centuries old.
* Theosophical Tracts. No. 4, p. 5.
f Esoteric Buddhism, p. 120.
�SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY.
15
Reincarnation is supported by no evidence, and is
therefore a superstition. Karma, being based upon it,
shares the same fate. Mrs. Besant asks me if I believe
in ethical causation. Of course I do—in this life.
Secularism has always taught that doctrine, and has
nothing to learn from Theosophy.
It appears to me that Mrs. Besant has dropped Secu
larism out of her mind altogether ; otherwise she
would scarcely ask us to concede that Theosophy isnot a “superstition” because it has been granted a
Charter of Incorporation at St. Louis, in America.
Christianity has a very big Charter of Incorporation in
England in the form of a State Church. On the other
hand, Secularism is outlawed, being incapable of hold
ing property or receiving bequests. Surely the Secu
larist will look grimly at this Theosophical passport of
respectability. I fancy, too, he will look no less grimly
at “ the broad platform ” offered him, which is to hold
“ Atheist and Theist, Christian and Hindu, Mohamme
dan and Secularist.” What a happy family ! The
only broad platform on which all men may stand is
the platform of humanity.
With respect to the Mahatmas, or Masters, or Wise
Men of the East, Mrs. Besant informs us that she
knows nothing of them personally. She “ believes in
the existence of these teachers on second-hand evi
dence.” These Great Souls do not appear to utter any
surprising wisdom. The specimens I have seen are
seldom worth the paper they are printed on. Their
“ abnormal powers ” are displayed in performances
that are common among Spiritualists and conjurors.
For my part, I am prejudiced against a Gospel which
is heralded by travelling cigarettes, broken-mended
saucers, and letters dropping from the ceiling. I pro
test that in comparison with the stories told of the
Adepts the Resurrection of Jesus Christ is a respectable
superstition.
This leads me to Mde. Blavatsky and her credentials.
Mrs. Besant accuses me of cirulating “ malignant
libels ” on this wonderful woman, and I am asked
what I should think if Mrs. Besant “ soiled her pages
with a repetition of the stories told against me by the
�14
SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY.
lecturers of the Christian Evidence Society.” But I
fail to see the analogy. If I were a thief, it would not
prove that Jonah was swallowed by a whale ; it 1 were
an adulterer, it would not prove the Incarnation ; it 1
were a murderer, it would not prove the Resurrection.
But if Mde. Blavatsky’s authority is offered for in
credible occurrences, what is one to .do but see if the
lady’s bond fides will bear investigation ? I discovered
that Mde. Blavatsky had been openly accused of decep
tion ; I looked into the evidence; and I satisfied
myself that a very black prima facie case was made
out against her. The charges were printed by respon
sible persons after careful and minute investigation.
Besides the terrible exposure of the Coulomb otters,
the letters of Koot Hoomi, a great Mahatma m Thibet,
are declared by experts to be in Mde. Blavatsky s hand
writing, and it is shown that Koot Hoomi made, the
same mistakes in spelling as Mde. Blavatsky, fell into
her foreign idioms in writing English, and reproduced
her very tricks of style. To call this a “ malignant
libel” is no answer. I say it is preposterous to accept
extravagant statements on the bare authority ot a lady
who lies under such grave suspicion of imposture.
Mrs. Besant is discreetly silent about the grotesque
science of Mde. Blavatsky in her Secret Doctrine, and
her extravagant credulity in Isis Unveiled. It would
not do to press these absurdities on the attention ot
Freethinkers. Nor does Mrs. Besant notice the curious
mistakes of Koot Hoomi, some of which, with their
attempted explanations, are enough to wrinkle the face
of an omnibus horse with laughter.
I now come to the question of celibacy. Mrs.
Besant seeks to minimise the effect of this doctrine.
This is a policy I shall at once expose. Unfortunately
for Mrs. Besant, her Theosophical mistress has spoken
too plainly about “ the path.” It appears that a Lanoo
r
(disciple) must take care to “ separate his outer body
.
_ ..
• T 1 _ J * 1 —T
from all external influence,” and “ must avoid bodily
______
He must
contact with human as with ^animal being.
touuh'even'the hand of the nearest and dearest ”
nOt “ tuLlVXX
™
,,
,,12~_ -1 -__ 'd
Even the love for wife and taniily5 ” we are told,
41 the purest as the"most unselfish of human affections,
U---------
�SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY.
15
is a barrier to real occultism.” Mde. Blavatsky insists
that “no one can serve his body and the higher Soul,
and do his family duty and his universal duty, without
depriving either the one or the other of its rights.” She
adds that “ it would be a ceaseless, a maddening struggle
for almost any married man, who would pursue true
practical Occultism.” *
Does not this corroborate what I said in my
pamphlet ? Does it not show that Theosophy, like
every sincere form of spiritualism, inevitably leads to
a war between the honest claims of “ the flesh ” and
the autocratic claims of “ the spirit ” ?
How far has Mrs. Besant departed from her old
teaching on this subject! “ Asceticism,” she said in
her tract on Secular Morality, “ asceticism, in any
shape, is immoral; it decreases the amount of temporal
happiness ; and whether it please God or no, whether
it give a seat in heaven or no, whether it brin^
happiness in a future life or no, it is equally immoral
it is equally wrong ” It-requires very little sagacity
to see that Theosophy, on this side, is quite incompatible
with Secularism.
The only answer Mrs. Besant makes is that everyone
need not become celibate. But she cannot deny that
celibacy is necessary to the “ higher life.” It is idle to
instance music, and to urge that people who have no
vocation for it need not “ practise eight hours a day.”
If music were the essential path to our highest spiritual
•culture we should be bound to give it our fullest devo
tion. Besides, there are degrees in music, but none in
celibacy. You cannot be partially celibate.
Mrs. Besant confesses that ,£ celibacy is one of the
smallest of the sacrifices ” which the higher Theosophy
demands. I am thankful for the admission. It will
put Secularists on their guard. Forewarned is fore
armed. It is well to know that “ the path ” leads to
•endless macerations of “ the flesh.”
Let me appeal to Freethought mothers to see what
Theosophy would mean to them. The doctrine of re
incarnation, for instance, would play havoc at once in
* Theosophical Tracts, No. 77pp. 5, 6,14, 15.
'
�16
SECULARISM AND THEOSOPHY.
the domestic circle. When the mother is crooning to
her babe, and watching the reflexion of her smiles on
its face, she is under a delusion. The baby is an old
stager. It is not her child. It is no relation to her.
Their connexion is nothing but a fleshly accident.
Once admit this monstrous idea, and celibacy and all
the rest of it may be accepted without a shudder.
I will conclude with another passage from the tract
on Secular Morality. “ Our morality,” Mrs. Besant
said, “ is tested only—be it noted—by utility in this
life, and in this world ; with any other life, with any
other world, we have nothing whatever to do.” All
this is now unsaid, and I am obliged to hold that Mrs.
Besant has ceased to be a Secularist. For what is the
Secular position with regard to Theism and Immortality ?
Our position is Agnostic. W§ neither deny nor affirm.
We say there is no knowledge. We take our stand on
that. We confine our practical philosophy to this life,
and admit no motives, sanctions or consolations that
relate to another. Mrs. Besant is no longer in this
position. I am convinced of it, and I honestly say so.
It is not for me to say more—at present. Secularists are
not fond of ostracism, and it is unfair to throw un
necessary responsibilities upon us.
Mrs. Besant
has become a Theosophist, and it is for
to determine
whether her new ideas are consistent with her old
convictions ; it is for her to decide whether they are in
harmony with the accepted principles and traditional
policy of our party. #
Printed and Published by G. W. Foote, at 28 Stonecutter Street, London, .0.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Secularism and theosophy : a rejoinder to Mrs Besant's pamphlet
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Foote, G. W. (George William) [1850-1915]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 16 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Printed and published by G.W. Foote. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Progressive Publishing Company
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1889
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N263
Subject
The topic of the resource
Secularism
Theosophy
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Secularism and theosophy : a rejoinder to Mrs Besant's pamphlet), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Annie Besant
NSS
Secularism
Theosophy
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/d13ed9db848b5b0ec35d62553bb6d36d.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=BaB6uRo1B7meaeVTVTeqMrwWSwek-A2mkL4AETxYM2Lwawpt2Y-PoeBoB5apsEDcBEDRHU%7ESLUNNhVHy-jq8ZcXEL7ejCe8ewpmkLxwthWzqZ0WhU0flNn02SEZZrhmF2c82-CFikxMYpm-I2PkhggtcxhEZSNgDckc8JTsN1rdqieZevSG5X-Oadqa%7EoJxiMHRXXC6skHyGFzj47DyHQfcEVj5KdaZndX3BpuY87YNnjXH3kHcw3lFExDkC8JjWygbFZpW3WLLwDxYrUXGcd3aXc2c-WV2cY2F4RVixe0r3U3Tna2-vkA%7E1cRYYhYIwlKmvpyydHJBKf5fI64lXSA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
3b7c3d6237af69c47c551fe622895a15
PDF Text
Text
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
THE NEW CAGLIOSTRO
AN OPEN LETTER
TO
MADAME BLAVATSKY
It is worth considering what element your Quack specially works in:
the element of Wonder ! The Genuine, be he artist or artisan, works
in the finitude of the Known; the Quack in the infinitude of the
Unknown.—Carlyle.
Price Twopence.
LONDON:
PROGRESSIVE PUBLISHING COMPANY,
28 Stonecutter Street, E.C.
1889.
�THE NEW CAGrLIOSTRO.
AN OPEN LETTER TO MADAME BLAVATSKY.
Madam,—In addressing this open letter to you I am
writing for the public rather than for yourself. I have
no expectation, and certainly no desire, of influencing
you in the slightest degree. You are personally a
stranger to me, your orbit is far removed from mine,
and I should never have felt any interest in your move
ments or teachings had it not been for the conversion
to Theosophy of a lady for whose character I entertain
the highest respect. Mrs. Besant’s change of position
was a phenomenon to which I could not remain
indifferent.
I had occasion to criticise her new
opinions, and in doing so I was obliged to notice you.
Mrs. Besant eulogised your personal character in glow
ing language. With that, however, I did not concern
myself; I was unable to perceive its connexion with
the truth or falsity of theosophic principles. But you
were also credited, at least by implication, with the
possession of extraordinary powers, which ordinary
men and women would regard as miraculous. It was
more than hinted that you were the connecting
link between the humble devotees of Theosophy in
the benighted West and the Wise Men of the East who
deliver their supernal oracles in the unexplored regions
of Thibet. Such statements were open to criticism,
and I dealt with them in my reply to Mrs. Besant.
My remarks were brief and pointed ; the space I
devoted to you being simply proportionate to the part
you played in Mrs. Besant’s apology. What I had to
say was not very complimentary, and I am not sur
prised at your annoyance. But I am suprised at your
being stung into replying. It is more than I dared
�g *2*9 3
The New Gagliostro.
3
to hope. I was afraid you would follow your wise old
plan of letting the storm blow until it spent itself and
was forgotten ; but, instead of this, you have given me
an opportunity of writing at greater length on what is
now an interesting subject.
Your pamphlet betrays a dreadful ill temper. This
is a fact of which I do not complain. A cross dis
putant generally gives himself away, and his sarcasms
are apt to raise a smile of pity. It was not with anger
that I read your observation that “ The Freethinker
has shown its foot, and henceforth it cannot fail to be
recognised by its hoof.” This delicate badinage is a
revelation of the sweetness and light which prevail in
the upper circles of esoteric philosophy. It shows
what exquisite powers of wit are wielded by the Chelas
and adepts who have cultivated their spirits on the
heights of being, and breathed the pure air of theosophic perfection.
You tell your readers, madam, that I am a
“slanderer,” that I am guilty of “false and malicious
accusations as brutal as they are uncalled for,” that I
have “ abused and denounced you,” that I have “ flung
handfuls of mud ” at you, that I have circulated “ lies
which have never been proven, and on which no
evidence is adduced,” and that I have made free with
your “ private life and personality.”
I reply that I have done nothing of the kind. I have
made no accusations against you ; I have not said a
single word about your private life.
With regard to the latter charge, I defy you to pro
duce a single proof. What are the facts ? Mrs. Besarit
described you, in her Star article, as “ the most
remarkable woman of her time,” as one who had “ left,
home and country, social position and wealth, to spend
her life and marvellous abilities ” in spreading
Theosophy. Now this is a publie utterance, open to
public criticism ; and as one of the public, I ventured
to ask the simple and modest questions—“What is
Mde. Blavatsky’s home, what is her country, what was
her social position, and what is the extent of her
wealth ? ” Certainly I have no claim to have these
questions answered, but when your praise is sounded
�4
The New Gagliostro.
so lustily, I have a right to ask them. Instead of
replying, you fly into a passion, and cry “impertinent! ”
Would it not be wiser to restrain the enthusiasm of
your friends? If they drag your “ personality ” into
the discussion, you ought not to be surprised at its
being canvassed. Am I to understand that you are
willing to profit by their eulogies, but resentful at any
request for information ?
You decline to answer my “ impertinent question,”
and refer me with a regal air to the Indian Political
Department and the Russian Embassy. No doubt both
of them have a pretty full dossier on Mde. Blavatsky,
but I have no intention of consulting them. They are
not likely to entrust me with their secrets, which may
be important if you visit India again. I notice,
however, that you supply the public with information
through circuitous channels. You are too discreet to
write your own biography ; you assign that mission to
your friends. Accordingly I find a long account of
your family connections in the Birmingham Gazette,
from the pen of Mrs. Besant. It is a subject on which
that lady has no personal knowledge, having only
recently formed your acquaintance. Still, I have no
reason to doubt her statement. I learn that you are
the widow of a Russian Councillor of State, that you
belong to the “highly placed family” of the Von
Hahns, and that your “ means ” are your own, drawn
from your father. This is very interesting, but the
extent of your “ means ” is not indicated. Mde.
Coulomb says you told her, in 1880, that the whole of
your income was derived from a sum of money left to
you by your father, which did not yield you more
than a hundred rupees a month. Of course poverty is
no crime, as wealth is no virtue ; and intrinsically it is
indifferent whether you are an aristocrat or a plebeian,
or rich or poor. But while you are enlightening the
world, through the agency of your friends, you may as
well be precise ; and when they parade your sacrifices
it is absurd to quarrel with a natural curiosity.
This is the full extent of my inquisitiveness as to
your “ private life,” and how does it justify your
indignation ? I made no charges ; I did not even
�The New Cagliostro.
5
make a statement; I simply asked a question, which
was provoked by the zeal of your admirers. I never
concerned myself for a moment with your domestic
affairs, how you live, what you eat and drink, and
whose society you frequent. I have nothing to do
with such matters, and I am as little of a Paul Pry as
any man on this planet. I am known, more or less
intimately, by hundreds of people, who are the judges
of my taste in this direction.
If I know myself, too, I would not do any person an
injustice, not even the prophetess of Theosophy. I
hasten, therefore, to withdraw a word I used, and the
only one I see reason to regret. I said that twenty
years ago you were “ practising as a spiritist 1 mejum ’
in America.” Now practising is the wrong word ; it
conveys more than I intended. I should have written
operating, or some such word. I did not mean that
you were living by your mediumship, and I frankly
apologise for the inadvertency. My object was to show
that you were a Spiritualist, and a medium, long before
you were a Theosophist, and this you are unable to
deny. It is proved by your letter to Human Nature
in April 1872, it is proved by Colonel Olcott’s People
from the Other World, and corroborated by Mde.
Coulomb. This lady says the Cairo seances came to
grief because the devotees found the apparatus with
which they had been deluded, especially the “ long
glove stuffed with cotton,” which represented ‘‘the
materialised hand and arm of some spirit.”
I am defied to “ prove beyond doubt or cavil that
Mde. Blavatsky has ever asked for or received any
reward whatever, of a material nature, during her
fifteen years of voluntary labor.” As I have never
asserted anything of the kind, I do not feel called upon
to prove it. I am not in a position to say Aye or No.
Every reader of Mde. Coulomb’s pamphlet will be able
to judge for himself in some respects, especially if he
looks carefully at two interesting letters (pp. 81, 85)
by Colonel Olcott, and another on the very next page
by Mde. Blavatsky herself.
“ Reward ” does not
always take the shape of direct payment. Besides, it
seems to me that “ the lady doth protest too much.”
�6
The New Cagliostro.
There is really no harm in living by the cause to which
you devote your life. Mrs. Besant herself has done it,
and is still doing it so far as Freethought is concerned.
The indispensable condition is that it be done honestly
and above-board.
On the other hand,, too much
protestation is apt to breed suspicion.
Your cash transactions, madam, were not called in
question in my pamphlet. They did not so much as
form the subject of an allrfsion. Why then are you so
vehemently indignant on the matter ? And why is so
scrupulous a lady so very tzwscrupulous in her
quotations. You represent me as saying that “ denuncia
tion of landlords, capitalists, and all privileged persons,
is silly screaming against 1 eternal justice.’ ” I did
indeed write the words, but I did not father them. I
said they were true, in my opinion, if—mark the if—if
Mrs. Besant’s doctrine of Karma were sound, if each
man “reaps exactly as he has sown,” (/each Ego goes
into “ such physical and mental environment as. it
deserves.” I was asking Mrs. Besant to reconcile
Karma with Socialism. You know this, yet you place
me before your readers as a person who cites “ eternal
justice ”—in which I do not believe—as the friend of
landlordism and privilege.
Again, you tell your readers that I described my
friend Mr. Wheeler as a profound scholar whom
Mrs. Besant “ can never hope to emulate.” What I
said in my pamphlet was that “ it would take Mrs.
Besant many years of close study to rival ” his “ know
ledge of Brahminism and Buddhism, as well as of
general ‘ occult ’ literature.” I also said in the Free
thinker that he knew “more about Buddhism and
Oriental thought generally than Mrs. Besant is ever
likely to learn.” I am writing nearly three hundred
miles from home, and the file of my paper is not before
me, but I unhesitatingly deny having written that Mr.
Wheeler was a “ profound scholar ” whom Mrs. Besant
“ can never hope to emulate,” notwithstanding your
printing the words as a quotation.
Mrs. Besant
knows a great deal, but not in this particular direction,
whereas Mr. Wheeler has studied Oriental literature
for more than twenty years.
�The New Cagliostro.
7
Further, you say that I censure, ‘ ‘ Mde. Blavatsky’s
arrogance” for “assuming to know more of these
religions and occultism than does Mr. Mazzini
Wheeler.”
Sheer invention, madam ; the birth of
your own fertile brain ! I did refer to your “ arro
gance,” but only in connexion with your attitude
towards Darwin and Haeckel, whom you presumed to
instruct in evolution ; one of whom you described as
“ idiotic,” and both of whom you styled “ the intel
lectual and moral murderers of future generations.”
I am aware that you are extensively read in useless
literature. You have a prodigious knowledge of occult
authors. You have made a wonderful collection of the
maggots of the human brain. There is hardly a
superstition which is not wholly or partially sanctioned
in your four portly volumes. Your heap of rubbish
is colossal. Mr, Wheeler himself looks upon it with
amazement. But after all, to borrow a phrase from
Charles Lamb, you have only gathered the rotten part
of the fruit of the tree of knowledge.
I will now consider what I did say of you in my
pamphlet. It is not true that I called you “ a thorough
paced adventuress.” I applied that phrase to the
writer of the letters to Mde. Coulomb, which I honestly
said you had “ repudiated as forgeries.” I as honestly
said, however, that Mde. Blavatsky “does not vin
dicate herself in the law courts, and the letters cer
tainly came from a more fertile brain than Mde.
Coulomb’s.”
What is your reply to this ? You scream at Mde,
Coulomb as a “Judas,” you protest against “insults
and slanders,” and you declare that they were “in
vented ” by the “ goldy Christian missionaries ” who
‘‘ bribed Mde. Coulomb ” and then “ cheated her out of
her well-earned blood-money.”
Admirable! madam. Your courage is superb. It
is worthy of Cagliostro himself when caught in the
toils. But, alas, your answer will not bear examina
tion. You have overdone your part. If Mde. Cou
lomb was bribed by the missionaries she might have
dishonestly put her name to forged documents in
India ; but, if she was cheated of her blood-money,
�8
The New Oagliostro.
why should she allow the pamphlet to be republished
in England ? If her motive was purely mercenary,
and she was without any other feeling, why should
she encourage the persons who have cheated her of
the price of her treachery ? Vengeance is sweet, and
the lower the nature the sweeter it is. The more,
therefore, you represent Mde. Coulomb as mean and
avaricious, the more incredible is her silence. If she
rounded on you, with no case, why, with a splendid
case, does she not round on the missionaries ? On the
other hand, is it conceivable that the missionaries
would invent the slanders, forge the correspondence,
and then, by withholding the “blood-money,” put
themselves at the mercy of a disappointed and
exasperated woman ?
There is one letter, ostensibly yours, madam, which
the missionaries could not have “ invented,” and from
which I take a striking extract. You are represented
as writing to Mde. Coulomb, from Poona, in October,
1883
“ Now, dear, let us change the subject. Whether something
succeeds or not, I must try. Jacob Sassoon, the happy pro
prietor of a crore of rupees, with whose family I dined last
night, is anxious to become a Theosophist. He is ready to
give 10,000 rupees, to buy and repair the headquarters, he said
to Colonel (Ezekiel, his cousin, arranged all this) if only he
saw a little phenomenon, got the assurance that the Mahatmas
could hear what was said, or gave him some other sign of their
existence (?!!). Well, this letter will reach you by the 26th
(Friday); will you go up to the shrine and ask K. H. (or
Christofolo) to send me a telegram that would reach me about
4 or 5 in the afternoon, same day, worded thus :
“Your conversation with Mr. Jacob Sassoon reached
Master just now. Were the latter even to satisfy him, still
the doubter would hardly find the moral courage to connect
himself with the society.
“ Ramalinga Deb.
“ If this reaches me on the 26th, even in the evening, it will
still produce a tremendous impression. Address, care of N.
Kandalawala, Judge, Poona. Je berai ee reste. . Oela
coutera quatre ou cinq roupies. Cela nc fait rien. [I will do
the rest. It will cost four or five rupees. That is of no con
sequence.]
“ Yours truly,
“ (Signed) H. P. B.” 1
i Some Accownt of my Intercourse with Aide. Blavatsky from 1S72 to
1884. By Madame Coulomb. London: Elliot Stock.
�The New Cagliostro.
9
Mde. Coulomb affirms that she sent the desired
telegram, as from Root Hoomi, a great Mahatma far
away in Thibet ; and I have been told that “ the fish
was landed.” You shelter yourself behind a general
repudiation. This is a plea of Not Guilty, but it is no
evidence for the defence. There is apparently a strong
corroboration of Mde. Coulomb’s story. Mr. Richard
Hodgson, who went out to investigate your occult
phenomena on the spot for the Society for Psychical
Research, reported as follows :—
“ The envelope which Madame Coulomb shows as belonging
to this letter bears the postmarks Poona, October 24th
Madras, October 26th; 2nd delivery, Adyar, October 26th; (as
to which Madame Blavatsky has written in the margin of my
copy of Madame Coulomb’s pamphlet: ‘ Cannot the cover have
contained another letter ? Funny evidence! ’). Madame
Coulomb also shows in connexion with this letter an official
receipt for a telegram sent in the name of Ramalinga Deb from
the St. Thome office, at Madras, to Madame Blavatsky at Poona,
on October 26th, which contained the same number of words
as the above.”2
I do not stand sponsor for the authenticity of your
reputed letters to Mde. Coulomb. I have my impres
sions, of course ; but, for all I know, you may have an
overwhelming defence. When yon offer it I will
listen with the deepest attention. Meanwhile I must
say that screaming “Judas 1” is not evidence. These
accusations of imposture are deliberate and circumstantial. If they were made against me, and I were
guilty, I would hold my tongue. If I were innocent, I
would refute them point by point, or vindicate my
character before a legal tribunal.
It is idle, madam, to ask me why I do not prosecute
the Christian Evidence agents for their “ shameful
accusations of gross profligacy launched against the
immaculate editor of the Freethinker.” Such accusa
tions are loose innuendoes, not open charges. They
are made against me in common with Mrs. Besant and
every other Freethought leader. And they are made
in the streets, in such circumstances that the law of
2 Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Eesearc/i, December, 1885,
�10
The New Cagliostro.
libel cannot reach them. I have heard for instance,
that I have run away with some one’s wife. Well, I
can afford to smile at such nonsense. All the same,
however, it may deceive the ignorant and unwary, and
T would prosecute the slanderers if they would only
put their libels in black on white. You urge that a
Christian jury would be prejudiced. Very likely.
But that has not prevented Mr. Bradlaugh from prose
cuting his libellers. In any case, one’s own friends,
and the impartial public, would have the facts before
them, and be able to form their own judgment.
You appear to forget an important point of your case.
My “ profligacy ” would not affect the truth of Freethought, but your “ imposture ” would seriously affect
the truth of Theosophy. The facts on which Freethought is based are quite independent of my
character; but what becomes of the wonderful
Mahatmas if the lady who is the authority for their
very existence is found concocting their messages ?
I now turn to the Report of the Society for Psychical
Research, with regard to which you write very in
accurately. You allege that in 1885 the Society accused
you of being a Russian spy. This is absolutely false.
The Society published Mr. Hodgson’s careful, elaborate,
and extremely able Report on your Indian wonders,
but did not endorse his speculations as to your moti ves.
It was Mr. Hodgson, and Mr. Hodgson only, who sug
gested a political motive for your Eastern adventures.
He found a rumor current in India that you were a
Russian spy, but he put it aside as “ unworthy.”
Subsequently, however, a singular piece of your hand
writing fell into his possession, breathing a strong
hatred of the British, looking forward to “ the approach
ing act of the Eastern drama ” which was to be “ the last
and the decisive one,” and declaring that those who
sat idle while the great preparations were going on
were traitors to their “ country and their Czar.” You
explained to Mr. Hodgson that it was probably a por
tion of a translation you had made from a Russian
work. “ Be this as it may,” Mr. Hodgson says, “ I
cannot profess myself, after my personal experiences
of Madame Blavatsky, to feel much doubt that her
�The New Gagliostro.
11
real object has been the furtherance of Russian
interests.”
Mr. Hodgson went out to India on behalf of the
Society to investigate your marvels on the spot. The
Society is on the hunt for occult phenomena, and
anxious to find them. Mr. Hodgson himself was far
from indisposed to discover something; whatever
prepossessions he had were “distinctly in favor of
occultism and Mde. Blavatsky.”
But after three
months’ close investigation he was obliged to conclude
that “ the phenomena connected with the Theosophical
Society were part of a huge fraudulent system worked
by Mde. Blavatsky with the assistance of the Coulombs
and several other confederates, and that not a Single
genuine phenomenon could be found among them all.”
The Psychical Society had for its president Professor
Balfour Stewart, Professor ’Sidgwick was among the
vice-presidents, Mr. F. W. H. Myers was a member of
the Committee with Professor Sidgwick, and among
the honorary members I see the names of Professor
Crookes, Mr. Gladstone, Mr. John Ruskin, Dr. A. R.
Wallace, and Lord Tennyson. When this is known,
madam, it will be futile on your part to ask English
men to regard the Society as a band of libellous
blackguards, whose Report would only be believed by
a “ fool.”
The Committee of the Psychical Society received
from Mr. Hodgson a selection of your reputed letters
to Mde. Coulomb, with some letters undoubtedly written
by you. These “ were submitted to the well-known
expert in handwriting, Mr. Netherclift, and also to Mr.
Sims, of the British Museum. These gentlemen came
independently to the conclusion that the letters were
written by Mde. Blavatsky.”
After carefully weighing all the evidence, the Com
mittee arrived at the following conclusions :—
(1) “ That of the letters put forward by Mde. Coulomb, all
those, at least, which the Committee have had the opportunity
of themselves examining, and of submitting to the judgment
of experts, are undoubtedly written by Mde. Blavatsky, and
suffice to prove that she has been engaged in a long-continued
combination with other persons to produce by ordinary means
�12
The New Cagliostro.
a series of apparent marvels for the support of the Theosophic
movement.
(2) “That, in particular, the Shrine at Adyar, through
which letters purporting to come from Mahatmas were re
ceived, was elaborately arranged with a view to the secret in
sertion of letters and other objects through a sliding panel at
the back, and regularly used for this purpose by Mde.
Blavatsky or her agents.
(3) “ That there is consequently a very strong general pre
sumption that all the marvellous narratives put forward as
evidence of the existence and occult power of the Mahatmas
are to be explained as due either (a) to deliberate deception
carried out by or at the instigation of Mde. Blavatsky, or (b) to
spontaneous illusion, or hallucination, or unconscious mis
representation oi' invention on the part of the witnesses.”
You cannot pretend, madam, that the Society has
been animated by prejudice or a desire to expose
you. . Its investigations were carried on quietly,
and its Report was published in the usual way
for its members.. Your injudicious friends are
responsible for this extended publicity. If you are
innocent, and all the evidences against you are
ridiculous fabrications, you have a splendid case
against the respectable firm of Triibner and Co, and the
wealthy members of the Society for Psychical Research.
Now for your Mahatmas. The great Root Hoomi’s
letters have been declared to be in your own
handwriting. Further, they betray your very tricks of
style. Mde. Blavatsky wrote “ Olcott says you speak
very well English,” and Root Hoomi wrote one who
understands tolerably well English.” Here is a small
list of their similarities of spelling
Mde. Blavatsky.
your’s, her’s3
expell
thiefs
deceaved, beseached
quarreling
cool.v (for “ coolly ”
lazzy, lazziness
consciensciously
defense
Koot Hoomi.
your’s
dispell, fulfill
thiefs
leasure
quarreling
alloted
in totto
circumstancial
defense.
Mde. Blavatsky makes the very same blunder “their’s” in the
pamphlet before me.
�The New Gagliostro.
13
Koot Hoomi also spelt “ skepticism,” an American
fashion of spelling, which yon might have acquired
in the land of the Stars and Stripes before your voyage
to India. Finally, Koot Hoomi spelt “ remarqued,” a
form of spelling easily fallen into by a Russian lady
with a good command of French and an imperfect
command of English.
It is also very singular, madam, that Koot Hoomi not
only repeated your curiosities of spelling, and your
very tricks of style, but actually repeated your crude
scientific blunders; writing of “ a bacteria,” and
confusing “ carbonic ” with “ carbolic ” acid. Still
more singular is it? if possible, that Koot Hoomi’s
hand-writing is remarkably like Mde. Blavatsky’s
disguised, and that the experts declare his letters to be
undoubtedly from your pen.
Considering that Koot Hoomi is a Wise Man of the
East, possessing supernormal wisdom and supernormal
powers, it is astonishing that he should write to Mr.
Sinnett from Thibet, in 1880, and give as his own a
long passage borrowed from a speech of Mr. H. Kiddle,
an American Spiritualist, which was reported in the
Banner of Light two months before the date of Koot
Hoomi’s letter.
Koot Hoomi’s explanation was
shuffling and preposterous; and, subsequently, Mr.
Kiddle was able to show that Koot Hoomi’s amended
letter still contained a number of unacknowledged
borrowings, in addition to the passages now marked
as quotations. Who can resist the conclusion of the
Psychical Society’s committee, that “The proof of a
deliberate plagiarism, aggravated by a fictitious defence,
is therefore irresistible ” ?
Koot Hoomi made another dreadful mistake in a
letter to Mr. Hume with reference to a young man in
his employment. After speaking of the young man’s
“inner soul-power and moral sense,” the Mahatma
continues :—
“ I have often watehed that silent yet steady progress, and
on that day when he was called to take note of the contents of
your letter to Mr. Sinnett, concerning our humble selves, and
the conditions you imposed upon us—I have myself learned a
�14
The New Oagliostro.
lesson. A soul is being breathed into him, a new Spirit let in,
and with every day he is advancing towards a state of higher
development. One fine morning the ‘ Soul ’ will find him ; but,
unlike your English mystics across the great Sea, it will be
under the guidance of the true living adept, not under the
spasmodic inspirations of his own untutored ‘ Buddhi,’ known
to you as the sixth principle in man.”
Mr. Hume appends a note that, at the very time this
was written, the good young man “ was systematically
cheating and swindling me by false contracts, besides
directly embezzling my money.” So much for the
“ learned spirit of human dealings ” of the great
Mahatma who is “ able to read the hidden thoughts of
others without first mesmerising them.”
As for Koot Hoomi’s poor tricks—such as disinte
grating and reintegrating letters, saucers, and cigarettes
—they would be looked upon with contempt by any
third-rate English conjuror ; while his “ astral appear
ance ” to the faithful at Madras is declared by the
Coulombs to have been operated by means of a dummy.
With respect to your own “ remarkable powers,”
they are probably as authentic as those of the Sheik
you tell of in Isis UnveiLed, who was absolutely bullet
proof, even at close quarters. We are informed that
you are very chary of exercising your “ remarkable
powers,” because they extend to the very life of other
people ; but most sensible persons, I fancy, will smile
at such extravagant pretensions. Nevertheless, I do
not undertake to deny your occult resources. I am
willing to believe you can “ eat a crocodile or drink up
Eisel ”—on production of proof.
You charge me, madam, with grossly misrepresent
ing Theosophy. I reply that all I have said of it is
based on the writings of yourself and Mrs. Besant. I
said that “ Spiritism is the logical issue of this fanciful
philosophy.” You answer that you are not a Spiritist.
I never said you were. I spoke of “ the logical issue ”
of your teaching. But why, in any case, will you
quarrel over straws ? You talk ofil astral appearances,”
and Mrs. Besant says the Ego can be separated from the
body during life and “ appear apart ” from it. Strictly
speaking, perhaps, this is not Spiritualism, as presented
�The New Oagliostro.
15
by the mediums ; but I venture to include it under the
general head of Spiritism.
You are good enough to remind me that my scepticsm
belongs only to “ a fraction ” of the human race. But
what does that signify ? Truth is not established by
appealing to numbers. I have no ambition to be on
the side of the majority. I desire to be on the side of
Truth.
With characteristic flippancy and inaccuracy, you
say that I urge the antiquity of the doctrine of re
incarnation as an objection to Theosophy.
I did
nothing of the kind. I gave a brief historical sketch of
the doctrine from the most obvious sources, in order to
give point to my wonder that Mrs. Besant should have
been “ struck with the charming novelty of very
ancient doctrines.” I need not deal, therefore, with
your demolition of your own man of straw.
You seek to turn the edge of my criticism of the
ethics of Theosophy by explaining away every
objectionable feature. Thus the “ destruction of self,”
and the “ killing out of personal desires,” are whittled
down to “ a control over one’s animal passions.” Really,
madam, one would think you were writing for children.
Do you imagine that grown-up people are to be cheated
into regarding “ control ” and “ destruction ” as
equivalent ?
You say I am fighting an imaginary windmill in
denouncing your doctrine of celibacy ; yet, in the very
same breath you show all the exquisite urbanity of
your refined nature, in asserting that my “ material
instincts ” are aroused against celibacy, which is
natural in one “ who is proud to claim kinship with
the gorilla.” I am not aware that I have ever pro
fessed pride in any kinship ; on the other hand, I do
not despise my lowly relatives ; and, on the whole, I
would sooner claim kinship with a gorilla than with a
Cagliostro.
Celibacy, you tell me, is “ not enforced ” in your
inner circle.
Very likely.
You are not able to
“ enforce ” anything. But is it not the rule ? With
respect to those who “ enter on the Path,” Mrs. Besant
states that “ if they mean to go any distance,
�16
The New Cagliostro.
they must lead a celibate life.” Observe the word,
madam—must!
You forget, also, what you have
written yourself on the subject. I take the following
passages from your own tract:—
“ Even the love for wife and family—the purest as the most
unselfish of human affections—is a barrier to real occultism . . .
The aspirant has to choose absolutely between the life of the
world and the life of Occultism. It is useless and vain to
endeavour to unite the two, for no one can serve two masters
and satisfy both. No one can serve his body and the higher
Soul, and do his family duty and his universal duty, without
depriving either the one or the other of its rights ; for he will
either lend his ears to the “ still small voice ” and fail to hear
the cries of his little ones, or he will listen but to the wants of
the latter and remain deaf to the voice of Humanity. It would
be a ceaseless, a maddening struggle for almost any married
man, who would pursue true practical Occultism instead of its
theoretical philosophy.4
You see, madam, I am not so “ absurdly ignorant ” of
your writings as you allege. When you write for
Theosophists you insist on celibacy ; when you write
for the outer world you pooh-pooh it, and instance “ a
member of the ‘ inner circle ’ who has just got married
to a second wife.”
You conclude by bidding the “ genii of Freethought”
to “ learn good manners first of all.” Thank you,
madam ; I have learnt many things from you. I have
learnt that Socrates died for the rotundity of the earth,
that men at one time had three eyes and four arms,
that Darwinism is moonshine, and that apes are the
offspring of human and animal parents. While you
impart such transcendent wisdom I shall always listen
with profound respect. It will cost me an effort to
believe it all, but I promise you, madam, that I will
believe as much as I can ; and after Mrs. Besant has
developed such unexpected credulity, there is surely
hope for the shrewdest Freethinker.
Yours doubtfully,
G. W. FOOTE.
4 “Theosophical Tracts,” No. vii., pp. 14, 15.
.Printed and Published by G. W. Foote, 28 Stonecutter Street, London, E.C.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The new Cagliostro : an open letter to Madame Blavatsky
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Foote, G. W. (George William) [1850-1915]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 16 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Madame Blavatsky co-founded the Theosophical Society and was a leader of the Theosophy religious movement. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Progressive Publishing Company
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1889
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N256
Subject
The topic of the resource
Theosophy
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The new Cagliostro : an open letter to Madame Blavatsky), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Annie Besant
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky
NSS
Theosophy
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/acd211e2f07470c71792affb24ab756d.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=DuFlcV1jgMTw3carBL94gzEfB92eu6dNtlav1lMGg6Reuc3ZzPjMOtbPf8GA-mBw-hzOuwwVX6PYwvtu2fhKBBNbNxR9Tw7qjB30XF2jd-Llj4JrGcKYc9ganc3CugKMjAFTO1poJ96TkGCquHlCJTa%7EZpdJKns-dLvwkZrJUy4G0GHlbot3SFoNGUn82t7vepCSADeoFUoBZY3Xkly9ZzbstzWYZxVDzM6lLaSJyT6wm5H-eMRkj8J93iS4JiVMpGO95XMQRVITBbGjuu3CqZb8nM%7EB7gdO4DjTnMKdg4vy129livEYBjHQGRbGhm3eUxWvR8Yk2pKHdYuGzOwOnA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
5cef4340d15a126eff3244a8eae6d3dc
PDF Text
Text
v_
j '-I
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
THE THERSITES
OF
FREETHOUGHT.
BEING
Keplg to certain Attacks.
BY
H. P. ^BLAVATSKY.
Xonfcon:
THEOSOPHICAL PUBLICATION
7 DUKE STREET, STRAND.
PRICE TWOPENCE.
SOCIETY,
�LONDON:
PRINTED
A BONNER, 34 BOUVERIE STREET,
FLEET STREET, EC.
�The Thersites of Freethought.
"Says Massinger:
" . . . . Malice scorn’d puts out
Itself; but argued gives a kind of credit
To a false accusation.”
These wise lines ought perhaps to stop my pen as they
have in many other cases. But if they fail to do so in
this instance, and if despite the contempt I feel for my
slanderers, I still notice false and malicious accusations
as brutal as they are uncalled for, it is not to “ argue ”,
but simply to correct some of them for the information
of fair-minded people. There is a counterpart to
Massinger’s sage remark in as wise an Eastern pro
verb : “If thou dost not wash off the mud thrown at
thy face, people will believe it dirty ”.
An article which appears in Lucifer for September,
“ Lie not one to another,” and which contains a few
words of sympathy for Mr. G. W. Foote, editor of the
Freethinker, was written in Jersey for the August Lucifer
and sent by me to Mrs. Besant to read and approve of,
since she is the heroine thereof. To my surprise she
kept it back, simply saying that she found it—in view
of some fresh developments, the nature of which she
did not communicate,—“too kind” with regard to
certain Freethinkers. It is only on returning to Lon
don that I had the opportunity of fully appreciating
the delicate feeling that made my friend withhold that
article at the time. A bigoted pamphlet called “ Mrs.
Besant’s Theosophy ” had just been written and pub-
�4
THE THERSITES OF FREETHOUGHT.
lished by that very G. W. Foote; and while I was:
expressing my sympathy with him as a persecuted
Freethinker, he was abusing and denouncing me, of
whom—outside of the slanders and lies so freely
invented and circulated against me by Christians in
connection with Theosophy—he knew, very evidently,
absolutely nothing. Indeed, although I had never sym
pathised with a certain brutal caricature on the Biblical
God in a now famous Christmas number of the Free
thinker, nor with other such caricatures, or his extreme
views, I had yet sympathised with him in his trouble,
and even strongly defended him, in India as well as in
England, considerably to my own disadvantage. Great
was my surprise, therefore, to find Mr. Foote in his last
pamphlet, while nominally aiming at Mrs. Besant,
continually flinging handfuls of mud at myself!
While fully admitting his right to discuss and even
abuse Theosophy, for it is a public movement, I deny
him that right with regard to my private life and
personality. Knowing nothing or little about the Theo
sophical Society, and still less of Theosophy, he has an
excuse—like everyone else who judges of that movement
on hearsay—for misrepresenting it, though even that
clashes strangely with his pretensions to be regarded as
an impartial and tolerant thinker. But what right has
Mr. Foote or his alter ego, Mr. Mazzini Wheeler, to
report about me lies which have never been proven, and on
which no evidence even is adduced ? It is these that I am
now determined to expose. I will begin, however, with
an innocent aberration of Mr. Foote.
Speaking of Mrs. Besant’s rapid conversion, who, “ in
less than six weeks or two months at the outside”, after
reviewing my “ Secret Doctrine”, became “ a fellow of
the Theosophical Society ”, the far-seeing editor of the
Freethinker shrewdly remarks :—
“ Surely no intellect like Mrs. Besant’s could undergo such rapid
changes by itself. Madame Blavatsky on the one side, and Mr.
Herbert Burrows on the other, may supply the explanation.”
This phrase, “ no intellect like Mrs. Besant’s could
undergo such rapid changes by itself”, has an ominous
ring, when coming from a Freethinker. It suggests
mental pictures of hypnotic malpractice, of witch’s
�THE THERSITES OF FREETHOUGHT.
5
^nvoutement, and crafty suggestion to believe oneself a
Theosophist. With such “ an intellect ” it implies more
than regular hypnotism, but verily Circean fascination
according to the rules of the black art. Does Mr.
Foote believe then in such possibilities in Nature?
And if he does, what a future pregnant with dangers for
Freethought does it unveil! For, if even Mrs. Besant’s
remarkable intellect has succumbed to Herbert Burrow’s
or to my magic powers, then why not the less remarkable
intellects of Mr. Foote and his friend, the champion
Orientalist of the age—Mr. Mazzini Wheeler? In this
case one would be inclined to believe in the truth of the
Light of the World's assertion, that poor Mr. Foote is
indeed “ filled with alarm, dismay, and despair ”, For,
as intellectually—though an undeniably clever man—he
is on a far lower plane than Mrs. Besant, as will be
recognised by all, what if he, the editor of the Free
thinker, ever fell under our lethal spells ! Should he
succumb next to our collective fascination, he would
have to become a fellow of the Theosophical Society, or
—die. And as it is not so certain at all that he would
be accepted by us in his present mood, I shudder to
think of the fatal consequences it would entail upon the
Freethought party.
As to supplying to Mr. Foote “ the explanation” he
demands, perhaps Mr. H. Burrows may condescend to
do so. As for “ Madame Blavatsky ”, she has no
intention whatever of supplying him with any explana
tion. All she has to say to him is that she is innocent
of Mrs. Besant’s conversion. This lady is a living
witness—whose truthfulness and word even Mr. Foote
would never dare to deny—to the fact that I had no
hand at all in her joining the Theosophical Society. I
had seen Mrs. Annie Besant only once, in the presence of
several other persons, and then we engaged only in general
conversation, previous to her sending in an application for
membership. Nor have I ever put any pressure upon her
—whether hypnotic or magical, since Mr. Foote seems to
endow me with such power. I will say more. Had I given
to the Theosophical Society such a valuable acquisition,
it would have been to me a matter for pride; but it was
not so, and, therefore, I feel compelled to reluctantly
�6
THE THERSITES OF FREETHOUGHT.
deny the flattering imputation. Moreover, I do not
hesitate to declare that “ an intellect like Mrs. Besant’s ”
yields to no pressure, except that of her own reasoning
powers. A noble heart like Mrs. Besant’s listens to no
voice, save that of the inner voice of truth—that of man’s
Divine nature, to which Mr. Foote is deaf and blind,
though it is a voice which speaks louder in us than all
the tones which ever roared amid thunder and lightning
on any Mount Sinai. Annie Besant has heard and
recognised that voice, and—she has becomesTheosophist
—which is more than simply “a fellow of the.
Theosophical Society ”.
Such a mistake on the part of the author of “ Mrs..
Besant’s Theosophy” is, however, a natural one, and
we have no quarrel with it. But when Mr. Foote
arguing “ from the terms of her (Mrs. Besant’s) eulogy
on Madame Blavatsky ” repeats satirically those terms
and forthwith falls foul of the latter, the question
becomes more serious.
This is what he says of one whom he ironically
suspects of being Mrs. Besant’s present “ guide, philo
sopher, and friend ” :—
“ She (Mrs. Besant) takes theosophy on trust from ‘ the most re
markable woman of her time ’ ; one, who asks for no reward but
‘ trust ’, which is what every mystery-monger starts with, and leads
*
to everything else; one who has ‘left home and country, social
position and wealth’, in order to bring us lessons from ‘ the wise
men of the East’,”
And then this “ wise man of the West ” proceeds to
ask:
“ Has Mrs. Besant made inquiry into these things, or has she
succumbed, body and soul, to the spell of the sorceress ? Where is
Madame Blavatsky’s home, what is her country, what was her
social position, and what the extent of her wealth ? Many persons
would like these questions answered. ...”
* Would not Mr. Foote, who is no “ mystery-monger," it is
evident—ask and expect “ trust ’’ from any pupil to whom he is
imparting instruction, though the latter is no better than the ex
ploded hypothesis of men descending from one common ancestor with
the tailless apes ? When he is able to prove beyond doubt or cavil
that Madame Blavatsky has ever asked for or received any reward
whatever, of a material nature, during her 15 years of voluntary
hard labour, then he may have more right to sneer at the statement,
than he has now.
�THE THERSITES OF FREETHOUGHT.
7
Very well; and I am willing to satisfy these persons.
To this portion of his impertinent question “ where is
my home, what was my country, social position ”, I
answer: Apply to the same source of information
whence Lord Ripon, when Viceroy, and the Simla
authorities derived their’s when they sent to Russia the
same queries. The official answers they received and
which were reprinted in the Pioneer (1880), were pre
sumably to their satisfaction, since they have never
repeated the question again. My “ home ”, is no State
secret; my “ country ” and late “ social position ”—no
chateau en Espagne, or that of a “ Swiss Admiral ”, but
matters of official documents and records in the AngloIndian Political Department and the Russian Embassy.
Let the pamphleteer apply there, if either will open its
doors to him, or condescends to answer.
He forgets one more accusation on a par with the
others. Why not add that in 1885, I was accused by
the S.P.R. of being a “ Russian Spy,” the admitted
mistake of the Anglo-Indian Government, notwith
standing ? But then, had not the gentlemanly Psychical
Researchers resorted to this last trump-card to prejudice
the British public against me, and show a motive for
my alleged “ frauds ”, what fool would ever have be
lieved in their Report ?
But Mr. Foote does not stop here. With the air of
one perfectly sure of his facts, he undertakes to answer
his questions himself, and adds:
. . . . “ Twenty years ago Madame Blavatsky was practising as
a spiritist ‘ mejum ’ in America.
In 1872 she gave seances in
Egypt
To this Madame Blavatsky replies to her slanderer:
You speak a deliberate falsehood, slandering another
more basely than you have yourself been slandered.
The writer dares not attack Mrs. Besant too roughly,
for there is not one honest, respectable Freethinker,
who would not in that case turn his back upon him.
The object of his present wrath is too well known, too
much respected and admired, by friend or foe, not to
find hundreds of defenders among honourable men, nor
can Mr. Foote—or rather he dares not—conveniently
forget the debt of gratitude he owes to her personally.
�8
THE THERSITES OF FREETHOUGHT.
And, because he dares not ventilate all his senseless
rage upon Annie Besant, he turns round, and like a
coward, insults and slanders another woman, because
he hopes to have nothing to fear from her !
A noble example of Freethought, forsooth! one that
every fair-minded English Secularist and Freethinker
may well feel proud of. The repetition of these slanders
puts the editor of the Freethinker almost on a par with
the godly Christian missionaries who have invented
them—those who first bribed Madame Coulomb to play
Judas, and then cheated her out of her well-earned
“ blood-money ”—and yet he is but a poor imitator of
all those Dissenters and Sectarians of the Pecksniffian
type. They, at least, have the merit of original inven
tion, while he only repeats what he hears others say,
and even that he must needs sorely mix up and con
fuse !
I defy the whole world to bring one single respectable
eye-witness to the fact that I have ever “ practised ” as
a spiritist medium, at any time of my life, or ever
given seances. As well call some of the English royal
family, the late Napoleon III, or the Russian Emperor
“mejum”, because they believed and do believe in
mediumistic phenomena, and investigated them. I
paid for my experience in abnormal manifestations, but
was never paid for them. Nor does it behove one who
experienced to his sorrow the leniency and impartiality
of the courts of law, to say as he does, that though she
(I) repudiated the “ Coulomb letters ”, she does not
“ vindicate herself in the law courts ”, When Mr. Foote
is ready to admit that the “ Blasphemy Law ” has been
justly applied in his case, and that he is ready to place
the vindication of his honour in the hands of a Christian
jury, then will he have some shadow of a right to twit
me for avoiding to do the same. Again; am I to as
sume that the shameful accusations of gross profligacy
launched against the immaculate editor of the Freethinker
by Christian agents of a type similar to those who ac
cused me, are true because he has not condescended to
prosecute them ? And am I to be free to repeat these,
and to give them wide circulation, merely answering
when challenged : “ Oh, they must be true, or he
�THE THERSITES OF FREETHOUGHT.
9
would have disproved them in court ” ? Or would Mr.
Foote regard it as a reputable mode of controversy if, in
order to raise prejudice against Secularism, I ask insult
ing questions as to the details of his private home life ?
What would the Freethinkers think of me if, because
a prominent Theosophist joined their ranks, thus going
back on our speculative metaphysics, I should write a
pamphlet over my own signature and in order to dis
credit Freethought, should ask (paraphrasing what Mr.
Foote says of me) the following slanderous gossip about
himself.
“ Has Mr., or Mrs. *** made inquiry into these things
• • • Where was Mr. Foote’s home, what his social
position, and the extent of his wealth before he became
a Freethinker ? Thirty years ago he was a Catechist
and public lecturer in camp meetings taking up ‘ collec
tions ’. In 1883 he was tried for blasphemy and con
demned to prison. He is a jail-bird. His so-called
Freethought was investigated by the Christian Evidence
Society and shown up as a wind-bag, and his supposed
science and learning have been exploded as ‘ part of
a huge fraudulent system ’; while the Y.M.C.A. has
revealed him to be ‘ a thorough paced adventurer ’ and
his Freethinker and other brutal and vulgar publications,
‘ the work of an accomplished charlatan ’—published
merely for gain.”
The sentences between quotation marks are Mr.
Foote’s own elegant expressions directed against me.
Would not every decent person on reading such an
attack, say that there can be very little to say against
Freethought if “ Madame Blavatsky ” in resenting
the conversion to it of a Theosophist, only repeats
against a leading Freethinker stale Christian abuse ?
Profiting by this opportunity I will close the subject
of Mr. Foote’s uncalled for attack on my personality to
say a few words with regard to his accusations—as
muddled up and confused as his first statements—
directed against Theosophy. He is quite welcome to
“regard the ethics of Theosophy as detestable”, for
it is but a tit for tat: I regard the teachings of
Materialism as detestable. So on that point, at least,
we are square. But, while I have studied and know
�IO
THE THERSITES OF FREETHOUGHT.
something of his materialistic teachings, he knows
nothing at all, I see, of Theosophy. It is not to answer
him or dissipate his prejudices, that I notice a few of
the mistakes, but to show to those who may have read
his misleading pamphlet how superficially he has
acquainted himself with that which he so vehemently
attacks. “ Spiritism ”, he says, “ is the logical issue of
this fanciful philosophy ”—to wit: the Secret Doctrine.
“ Theosophists seem all infected with this melancholy
superstition which flourishes in gross luxuriance among
savages.” And also, Mr. Foote might have added
among sixty thousand Parisians, in the capital of France
alone: plus, among several millions of more or less
cultured Americans and Englishmen, without stopping
to notice the “ savages ” of other nationalities. But it
so happens that “ Spiritism ” or Spiritualism has not
infected Theosophists at all. Fellows of our Society
really “ infected ” (the word is happily chosen) with
belief in “Spirits” are very few, and then, while re
maining members of the Theosophical Society, are no
“ Theosophists ”—but “ Spiritualists ”, one name not
interfering with the other. Spiritualism is tolerated
and its rights respected in our ranks, just as is
Christianity, Socialism or Freethought of any degree.
Our rules do not permit us to meddle with the personal
belief, religious or political views, or private life of the
members, so long as these do not interfere with, or
become harmful to, our three declared objects. Perhaps,
before talking of and criticising a subject he knows
evidently nothing about, Mr. Foote would do well to
read “The Key to Theosophy” just published. Nor
does “ Madame Blavatsky ” believe in Spiritualism or
the “return of the dead” ; nor does the Theosophical
doctrine countenance either. Both, however, teach the
occurrence of a great variety of phenomenal, or so-called
mediumistic manifestations, refusing at the same time
to see in them anything supernatural, or outside the
powers of man. Surely, even Materialism, with all its
arrogance, can hardly claim possession of the last word
of science—its negative views being simply the result of
the collective experiences of sceptics in every age—a
very small portion of humanity. Freethought (when under
�THE THERSITES OF FREETHOUGHT.
II
stood in its general and original meaning, and before the
noble term was narrowed down and dwarfed by its
bigoted sectaries to its present meaning) includes even
“ Spiritism,” as well as every other belief that happens
to run off the orthodox track of Churches and Revela
tions (Vide Webster’s Diet.). Under these circumstances,
Mr. Foote’s noiseful personality can hardly be found
included in the number of those of whom Job ironically
predicated that “ wisdom shall die ” with them ; so that
his opinion cannot be held to conclude the controversy.
We believe in the testimony of our senses, first of all;
then, in the accumulated experience and evidence of that
portion of mankind which believes in unseen worlds and
invisible Presences, and which is as 99 to 1 when com
pared with that fraction which denies all. Withal, I
for one am not a “ Spiritist ” nor am I a “ modern
Spiritualist ” ; and did the editor of the Freethinker know
anything at all of our society, he would have paused
before confusing Theosophy with Spiritism. The
animosity shown to Theosophy, and myself especially,
by “ Spiritists ” the world over, is neither less deep nor
more polite in its expression than the bad feeling shown
by Mr. Foote. In this he is on a par with the believers
in Biblical “ miracles ” and in rapping “ spirits ”.
Then, we are twitted with the undeniable fact that
the doctrine of re-incarnation “was not brought up by
Theosophy”. No one has ever thought of putting
forward any such claim, and every school-boy must
know that belief in re-incarnation—flippantly called
metempsychosis—is as old as the world. Nor would it
gain ground as it does were it a new-fangled belief.
But as it is a doctrine believed in by the greatest and
most intelligent nations of antiquity, by the greatest
philosophers and sages, and that it is also the most logical
doctrine which leaves no gaps, knows of no missing
links, and explains almost every social and human
problem—Theosophists, as the most intellectual among
the members of the Theosophical Society, believe in it.
But Mr. Foote—who innocently imagines that no Theo
sophist, nor any other mortal save himself, probably,
can know that which he, and the erudite Mr. Mazzini
Wheeler know—gravely brings forward against us
�12
THE THERSITES OF FREETHOUGHT.
proofs which he believes very crushing. Had he only
looked into our Theosophical literature he might have
found therein ten times more evidence about the
antiquity of the doctrine of reincarnation, than he has
adduced. Reading his oratory one can only wonder
that among his new and crushing proofs that Theosophy
is an old superstition, he fails to notify his credulous
readers of Queen Anne's death; but as his object is to
show that we are plagiarists and frauds, he is not very
careful in the selection of his weapons ; hence he adduces,
as one more striking argument against Mrs. Besant’s
delusion, that reincarnation (or “ transmigration of souls”
as he calls it) was taught by the Egyptians, by Plato,
and the ancient Jews.
Well, and what of that ? Because Mr. Foote has
neither invented nor begotten Freethought, shall we
therefore, be justified in asserting that there is no truth
in his disquisitions against the Bible ? Shall we, because
Democritus, Epicurus, and even the pre-Buddhistic
Nastikas were Atheists, and preached the infidel doc
trines that we find in the Freethinker; shall we say that
all those who join the ranks of Freethought must have
been moonstruck “through the agency” of the infidel
Sorcerer, who goes by the name of G. W. Foote ? For
such are the weighty and eloquent arguments brought
by our traducer against Theosophy for Mrs. Besant’s
information.
Then comes the query how that devoted lady “ recon
ciles Karma with Socialism ”. The denunciation of
both is too sneering to be of any philosophical value.
“ Denunciation of landlords, capitalists, and all privi
leged persons, is silly screaming against ‘ eternal
justice’” he tells us. Thus, at least, “it appears” to
Mr. Foote. The subject is too wide a one to deal with
here, so we refer Mr. Foote for information to an article
on the subject in this month’s Lucifer.
The altruism taught by Theosophy comes in next for a
shower of delightful tropes. Our critic seems quite in
nocent of the distinction between theoretical and practical
altruism. The “killing out of personal desires ”, i.e., con
trol over one’s animal passions, which alone distinguishes
rational man from the irrational brute, is branded as a most
�THE THERSITES OP FREETHOUGHT.
13
“ pernicious and grotesque ” teaching ; after which the
writer approaches his final and “ critical ” point. He
analyses the rules of the “ inner circle ” or rather what
he thinks he knows of them on the scanty information
received, and forthwith falls foul of the idea that to
pursue the “ path ” one “ must lead a celibate life ”.
Against this rule all the materialistic instincts of one
who is proud to claim kinship with the gorilla are fairly
aroused. “ Celibacy is not the loftiest rule of life”, he
exclaims. “ Physically, mentally, and morally, it is
attended with the gravest dangers”, and so on, the
reader being treated to almost every stale and wellknown argument upon the question. The eloquent
editor of the Freethinker fights the wind-mills of his own
imagination as no Don Quixotte has ever fought them—
begging pardon of the noble Spaniard’s shade for the
comparison. His article is brought to an end by the
following solemn announcement: “ Spiritism on one side
and celibacy on the other, are the evil angels of Theo
sophy ”, They may lead Mrs. Besant, who “ is not an
adventuress ”, into dangers ominously hinted at.
This phrase settles Mr. Foote in our opinion. He is a
very brutal but not skilful fencer, and his arguments
are as—
“ Blunt as the fencer’s foils which hit but hurt not.”
Celibacy is not enforced either in the Society or its inner circle
any more than vegetarianism. Thus once more the vituper
ative critic is shown not to know what he is talking
about. A sufficient proof of this will be found in the
fact that a large proportion of the members are married
people, and that some eat meat and, when sick, drink
wine even in the inner circle. None of these rules are en
forced, and they are optional. A member of the “ inner
circle ” has just got married to a second wife, and this
does not prevent him from belonging to it as in the past.
Of course there are circumstances when all these injunc
tions become obligatory; but it also stands to reason
that the details of such cases will not be made public to
satisfy curiosity. Suffice it to say that whether arguing
against Theosophy and the rules of the Society, or
throwing mud at people who have never injured him,
�14
THE THERSITES OF FREETHOUGHT.
Mr. G. W. Foote shows himself absurdly ignorant of
the subjects of his insane attacks. It is, however,
Freethought alone that he injures by such language,
Theosophy being too invulnerable to be wounded by
such poor logic as seems to be at his disposal. Ex pede
Herculem! The Freethinker has shown its foot, and
henceforth it cannot fail to be recognised by its hoof.
As to our other opponent from the same quarter—
the omniscient Mr. J. Mazzini Wheeler, “ whose know
ledge of Brahmanism and Buddhism, as well as of
general ‘ occult ’ literature, it would take Mrs. Besant
many years of close study to rival ”, as saith the editor
of the Freethinker—it is hardly worth my while to
notice his Oriental effusions, even as he has noticed my
“ Secret Doctrine,” which, by-the-bye, he obtained from
me in somewhat dubious fashion. Having written to
me a polite letter to ask for the work to review it, he
took the opportunity of flinging abuse at both work and
author. And yet the knowledge of this “ renowned
Orientalist ” and daring explorer, who studied Brah
manism and Buddhism (let alone ‘ occult ’ literature) in
the unapproachable fastnesses of the British Museum,
seems shaky indeed, as I will now prove. Nevertheless,
his “ profound scholarship ” on these subjects, attained
by his indefatigable travels in the dangerous wilds and
the table-lands of the Museum’s halls, is contrasted
with “ Madame Blavatsky’s arrogance” for assuming to
know more of these religions and Occultism than does
Mr. Mazzini Wheeler ! Indeed, in the inexorable logic
and modesty of these two apostles of Freethought, one
who has been almost born and brought up among
Buddhists and passed many years in India and Central
Asia, is not supposed to know more than a man who
has never set foot in these lands, and who certainly is
not a Max Muller. I have read Mr. Wheeler’s
“ Buddhism in Tibet,” a long article in which, for every
line which emanated from his own pensive brain, one
finds fifty lines of quotations and compilations from well
known works on Buddhism, in which hypothesis and
conjectures supplement personal knowledge on every
page. So learned is that profound scholar, whom Mrs.
Besant “ can never hope to emulate ”, that, in his philo-
�THE THERSITES OF FREETHOUGHT.
15
logical achievements, he seems even unable to recognise
•one Buddhist name from another, when, instead of being
transliterated, it is written phonetically! Thus one
instance will suffice to expose the ignorance of this'
“reputable traveller” in the unexplored lands of the
London libraries. Copying and repeating, parrot-like,
information culled from Schlagintweit and Sarat
Chandra Das (the latter being known personally to Indian
and some European Theosophists), he gravely declares:
“ Of Thibetan Buddhists there are nine sects . . . .
*
needless to say, the Root Hoompa are not among them.”
We open Schlagintweit’s “Buddhism in Tibet” and read
page 73: “ 3. The Kadampa sect .... founded
in the year 1002 a.d., etc.” Now “ Kadampa,” pro
nounced in Bhutan, Kau-dtompa ; is written, Kagdamspa;
and pronounced a little further to the East, Koot-hoompa.
Every Lama in Darjeeling will tell him so. But, of
course, Mr. Wheeler cannot be expected to know the
difference. His remark was meant as a witty sally at
Theosophists and myself who wrote about that sect.
And perhaps also at Koothoomi, the Sanskrit name of
a sage, which name has nought to do with that
of Koothoompas.
But, indeed, the genii of Freethought have already
had more attention bestowed upon them than they are
worth. Let them learn good manners first of all; then,
perhaps, in their next incarnation, they may hope to
learn as much about real Buddhism and Brahmanism
(not book speculations and guesses) as I have forgotten
in this one.
* There are seventeen, if you please, which can be enumerated
from the work of Ugyen Gyats’ho, a learned Lama from the
Pemiongchi Lamasery, an author a little more learned about his own
country than Schlagintweit, and known well to the Government
officials in Bengal. He was the teacher of Major Lewin, late
Deputy Commissioner of Darjeeling.
�>
. •■ Sot rii
. >. ': ,.^'aaoHf
:m-X v;r>v,^
,
.ii . .!-, y/rfco •
’’frh
■- . r. <
;
hff.'X
:r
.
,6 -;m ?'
';.:.-’O-..';, s.?k lo”
■'. e Atj thA. £
,
jt
«.; in J.i!>xChX jjJirt
; f
t
T;
.‘.I'tiOV/
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The Thersites of freethought being a reply in certain attacks
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Blavatsky, H. P. (Helena Petrovna)
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 15 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: A riposte to the opinions and writings of G.W. Foote. Printed by A. Bonner, 34 Bouverie Street, London. Tentative date of publication from KVK (OCLC WorldCat). Helena Petrovna Blavatsky was a Russian occultist/esoteric philosopher, and author who co-founded the Theosophical Society in 1875.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Theosophical Publication Society
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1889?]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5796
Subject
The topic of the resource
Theosophy
Free thought
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (The Thersites of freethought being a reply in certain attacks), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Freethought
George William Foote
Theosophy
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/071a486dec65ed69f8aa33d77aca5988.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=PcOMOJJot9FUxC5GEAtCJ6sMlFRkeKknXRl0FCrGRCjfwSl%7EXPw33aQ6q0iT3CrEYzSGN%7E9ViDOwYmsQ1TnbkAmZ%7E4TphArREshaDEgNV-u1UboFaTwiAoBqBcZtY2GBcDit9EOhzQTWjPb0pFE-otvRZ9ZXAs%7E9AjHfPj1UiHw08ImIdGAeO6G9DZ1pO0v%7EShclqs1XQhqjnJ689vqTZjvjWRf1ZKFEzuKe0%7E4LnDfDzYVQZvHhXYjLzXQ4BYUUHWjxn3b8LMk81yRMEc-d9oACgKX46JVmVjd7wziFRCigl9EOuvO1Wtud-YFke3OOeTS3jp18FldBRKv5Tb6dtg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
94debbb13ba624731f04e80f53e086b4
PDF Text
Text
4f»
WHY I BECAME
A THEOSOPHIST.
BY
ANNIE
BESANT.
(Fellow of the Theosophical Society.)
LONDON
FREETHOUGHT PUBLISHING COMPANY,
63 FLEET STREET, E.C.
1 8 8 9.
PRICE
FOURPENCE.
•
�LONDON :
PRINTED BY ANNIE BESANT AND CHARLES BRADLAUGH,
63 FLEET STREET, E.C.
�6^"
national secular society
WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
---------- >---------Endurance is the crowning quality
And patience all the passion of great hearts ;
These are their stay, and when the leaden world
Sets its hard facs against their fateful thought,
And brute strength, like a scornful conqueror,
Clangs his huge mace down in the other scale,
The inspired soul but flings its patience in,
And slowly that outweighs the ponderous globe.
One faith against a whole world's unbelief,
One soul against the flesh of all mankind.
Growth necessarily implies change, and, provided the
change be sequential and of the nature of development,
it is but the sign of intellectual life. No one blames the
child because it has out-grown its baby-clothes, nor the
man when his lad’s raiment becomes too narrow for him ;
but if the mind grows as well as the body, and the intel
lectual garment of one decade is outgrown in the following,
cries are raised of rebuke and of reproach by those who
regard fossilisation as a proof of mental strength. Just now
from some members of the Freethought party reproaches
are being levelled at me because I have proclaimed myself
■a Theosophist. Yet of all people Freethinkers ought to
be the very last to protest against change of opinion per se ;
for almost every one of them is a Freethinker by virtue of
mental change, and the only hope of success for their
propaganda in a Christian country is that they may persuade others to pass through a similar change. They are
•continually reproaching Christians in that their minds are
not open to argument, will not listen to reason; and yet,
if one of themselves sees a further truth and admits it,
they object as much to the open mind of the Freethinker
as to the closed mind of the Christian. To take up the
�4
WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
position assumed by some of my critics is to set up a new
infallibility, as indefensible, and less venerable, than that
of Rome. It is to claim that the summit of human know
ledge has been reached by them, and that all new know
ledge is folly. It is to do what Churches in all ages have
done, to set up their own petty fences round the field of
truth, and in so doing to trace the limits of their own
cemeteries. And for the Freethinker to do this is to be
false to his creed, and to stain himself with the most
flagrant inconsistency; he denounces the immovability of
the Church as obstinacy, while he glorifies the immovability
of the Freethinker as strength ; he blames the one because
it shuts its ears against his new truth, and then promptly
shuts his own ears against new truth from some one else.
Let us distinguish : there is a vacillation of opinion
which is a sign of mental weakness, a change which is a
turning back. When all the available evidence for a
doctrine has been examined, and the doctrine thereupon
has been rejected, it shews a mental fault somewhere if
that doctrine be again accepted, the evidence remaining
the same. It does not, on the other hand, imply any
mental weakness, if, on the bringing forward of new
evidence which supplies the lacking demonstration, the
doctrine previously rejected for lack of such evidence, be
accepted. Nor does it imply mental weakness if a doctrine
accepted on certain given evidence, be later given up on
additions being made to knowledge. Only in this way is
intellectual progress made; only thus, step by step, do we
approach the far-off Truth. A Freethinker, who has
become one by study and has painfully wrought out his
freedom, discarding the various doctrines of Christianity,
could not rebelieve them without confessing either that ho
had been hasty in his rejection or was insecure in his new
adhesion : in either case he would have shewn intellectual
weakness. But not to the Freethinker can be closed any
new fields of mental discovery ; not on his limbs shall be
welded the fresh fetters of a new orthodoxy, after he has
hewn off the links of the elder faith; not round his eyes,
facing the sunshine, shall be bound the bandage of a
cramping creed ; not to him shall Atheism, any more than
Theism, say : “ Thus far shalt thou think, and no further
Atheism has been his deliverer; it must never be his
gaoler: it has freed him; it must never tie him down..
�WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
5
Grateful for all it has saved him from, for all it has taught
him, for the strength it has given, the energy it has
inspired, the eager spirit of man yet rushes onward,
trying: “ The Light is beyond! ”
I maintain, then, that the Freethinker is bound ever to
keep open a window towards new light, and to refuse to
pull down his mental blinds. Freethought, in fact, is an
intellectual state, not a creed; a mental attitude, not a
series of dogmas. No one turns his back on Freethought
who subjects every new doctrine to the light of reason,
who weighs its claims without prejudice, and accepts or
rejects it out of loyalty to truth alone. It seems necessary
to recall this fundamental truth about Freethought, in
protest against the position taken up by some of my critics,
who would fain identify a universal principle with a special
phase of nineteenth century Materialism. The temple of
Freethought is not identical with the particular niche in
which they stand.
Nor is the Freethought platform so narrow a stage as
Mr. Foote would make out in his recent attack on me. He
accuses me of using the Freethought platform “ in an un
justifiable manner ”, because I have lectured on Socialism
from it, and he is afraid that I may lecture on Theosophy
from it and 11 lead Freethinkers astray ”. I have hitherto
regarded Freethinkers as persons competent to form their
own judgment, not mere sheep to be led one way or the
other. There is a curious clerical ring in the phrase, as
though free ventilation of all opinions were not the very
life-blood of Freethought. It is a new thing to seek to
exclude from the Freethought platform any subject which
concerns human progress. In his younger and broader
days, Mr. Foote lectured from the Freethought platform
on Monarchy, Republicanism, the Land Question, and
Literature, and no one rebuked him for unjustifiable use of
it; now he apparently desires to restrict it to attacks on
theology alone. I protest against this new-fangled narrow
ing of the grand old platform, from which Carlile, Watson,
Hetherington, and many another fought for the right of
Free Speech on every subject that concerned human wel
fare, a noble tradition carried on in our own time by
Charles Bradlaugh, who has always used the Freethought
platform for political and social, as well as for anti-theological, work. I know that of late years Mr. Foote has
�6
WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
narrowed his own advocacy, but that gives him no claim to
enforce on others a similar narrowness, and to denounce
their action as unjustifiable when they carry on the use of
the platform which has always been customary. For my
own part, I have so used it since I joined the Freethought
party: I have lectured on Radicalism and on Socialism,
on Science and on Literature, as well as on Theology, and
I shall continue to do so. Of course if the National Secular
Society should surrender its motto, “We seek for Truth ”,
and declare, like any other sect, that it has the whole
truth, there are many who would have to reconsider their
position as members of it. If the National Secular Society
should follow Mr. Foote’s recent departure, and seek to
exclude from the platform all non-theological subjects, it
has the right to do so, though it ought then to drop the
name of Secular and call itself merely the Anti-Theological
Society; but until it does, I shall follow the course I have
followed these fifteen years, of using the platform for
lecturing on any subject that seems to me to be useful.
When the National Secular Society excludes me from its
platform I must of course submit, but no one person has a
right to dictate to the Society what matters it shall discuss.
A few weeks ago a Branch of the National Secular Society
wrote asking me to lecture on Theosophy: was I to answer
that the subject was not a suitable one for them to
consider ? Mr. Foote in one breath blames me for not
explaining my position to the Freethought party, and in
the next warns me off the platform from which the
explanation can best be made. I had no paper in which
I could give my reasons for becoming a Theosophist, and
I am told that to use the platform is unjustifiable I Leaving
this, I pass to the special subject of this paper, “Why I
became a Theosophist”.
Mr. Foote writes, with exceeding bitterness, that “amidst
all her changes Mrs. Besant remains quite positive
What are all these changes ? Like Mr. Foote and most of
the rest of us, I passed from Christianity into Atheism.
After fifteen years, I have passed into Pantheism. The
first change I need not here defend; but I desire to say
that in all I have written and said, as Atheist, against
supernaturalism, I have nothing to regret, nothing to
unsay. On the negative side Atheism seems to me to be
unanswerable; its case against supernaturalism is com
�WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
7
plete. And for some years I found this enough : I was
satisfied, and I have remained satisfied, that the universe is
not explicable on supernatural lines. But I turned then to
scientific work, and for ten years of patient and steadfast
study I sought along the lines of Materialistic. Science, for
answer to the questions on Life and Mind to which Atheism,
as such, gave no answer. During those ten years I learned
both at second hand from books and at first hand from
nature, something of what was known of living organisms,
of their evolution and their functions. Building on a sound
knowledge of Biology I went on to Psychology, still striving
to follow nature into her recesses and to wring some answer
from the Eternal Sphinx. Everywhere I found collecting
of facts, systematising of knowledge, tracing of sequences :
nowhere one gleam of light on the question of questions :
“ What is Life ? what is Thought
Not. only was
Materialism unable to answer the question, but it declared
pretty positively that no answer could ever be given.
While claiming its own methods as the only sound ones,
it declared that those methods could not solve the mystery.
As Professor Lionel Beale says (quoted in “ Secret
Doctrine”, vol. i, p. 540): 11 There is a mystery in life—
a mystery which has never been fathomed, and which
appears greater, the more deeply the pheenomena of life
are studied and contemplated. In living centres—far
more central than the centres seen by the highest magni
fying powers, in centres of living matter, where the eye
cannot penetrate, but towards which the understanding
may tend—proceed changes of the nature of which the
most advanced physicists and chemists fail to afford, us
the conception: nor is there the slightest reason to think
that the nature of these changes will ever be ascertained
by physical investigation, inasmuch as they are certainly
of an order or nature totally distinct from that to which
any other phsenomenon known to us can be relegated.”
Elsewhere he remarks: “Between the living state of matter
and its non-living state there is an absolute and irrecon
cilable difference; that, so far from our being able to
demonstrate that the non-living passes by gradations into,
or gradually assumes the state or condition of, the living,
the transition is sudden and abrupt.; and that matter
already in the living state may pass into the non-living
condition in the same sudden and complete manner. . . .
�8
WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
The formation of bioplasm direct from non-living mafter
is impossible even in thought, except to one who sets
absolutely at nought the facts of physics and chemistry”
(“Bioplasm,” pp. 3 and 13). Under these circumstances,
it was no longer a matter of suspending judgment until
knowledge made the judgment possible, but the positive
assurance that no knowledge could be attained on the
problem posited. The instrument was confessedly un
suitable, and it became a question of resigning all search
into the essence of things, or finding some new road. It
may be said : “Why seek to solve the insoluble? ” But
such phrase begs the question. Is it insoluble because
one method will not solve it ? Is light incomprehensible
because instruments suitable for acoustics do not reveal its
nature ? If from the blind clash of atoms and the hurtling
of forces there comes no explanation of Life and of Mind,
if these remain sui generis, if they loom larger and larger
as causes rather than as effects, who shall blame the
searcher after Truth, when failing to find how Life can
spring from force and matter, he seeks whether Life be
not itself the Centre, and whether every form of matter
may not be the garment wherewith veils itself an Eternal
and Universal Life ?
Riddles in Psychology.
No one, least of all those who have tried to understand
something of the “ riddle of this painful universe”, will
pretend that Materialism gives any answer to the question,
“ How do we think ? ”, or throws any light on the nature
of thought. It traces a correlation between living nervous
matter and intellection; it demonstrates a parallelism
between the growing complexity of the nervous system
and the growing complexity of the phenomena of
consciousness; it proves that intellectual manifestations
may be interfered with, stimulated, checked, altogether
stopped, by acting upon cerebral matter; it shows that
certain cerebral activities normally accompany psychical
activities. That is, it proves that on our globe, necessarily
the only place in which its investigations have been carried
on, there is a close connexion between living nervous
matter and thought-processes.
�WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
9
As to the nature of that connexion knowledge is dumb,
and even theory can suggest no hypothesis. Materialism
regards thought as a function of the brain; ‘1 the brain
secretes thought”, says Carl Vogt, “as the liver secretes
bile”. It is a neat phrase, but what does itw&n? In
every other bodily activity organ and function are on the
same plane. The liver has form, color, resistance, it is an
object to the senses; its secretion approves itself to those
same senses, as part of the Object World; the cells of the
liver come in contact with the blood, take from it some
substances, reject others, recombine those they have
selected, pour them out as bile. It is all very wonderful,
very beautiful; but the sequence is unbroken; matter is
acted upon, analysed, synthesised afresh; it can be sub
jected at every step to mechanical processes, inspected,
weighed; it is matter at the beginning, matter all through,
matter at the end; we never leave the objective plane.
But “the brain secretes thought” ? We study the nerve
cells of the brain; we find molecular vibration; we are
still in the Object World, amid form, color, resistance,
motion. Suddenly there is a Thought, and all is changed.
We have passed into a new world, the Subject World;
the thought is formless, colorless, intangible, imponder
able ; it is neither moving nor motionless; it occupies no
space, it has no limits; no processes of the Object World
can touch it, no instrument can inspect. It can be analysed,
but only by Thought: it can be measured, weighed, tested,
but only by its own peers in its own world. Between the
Motion and the Thought, between the Object and the Sub
ject, lies an unspanned gulf, and Vogt’s words but darken
■counsel; they are misleading, a false analogy, pretending
likeness where likeness there is none.
Many perhaps, as I have said, like myself, beginning
with somewhat vague and loose ideas of physical pro
cesses, and then, on passing into careful study, dazzled by
the radiance of physiological discoveries, have hoped to
find the causal nexus, or have, at least, hoped that here
after it might be found by following a road rendered
glorious by so much new light. But I am bound to say,
after the years of close and strenuous study both of
physiology and psychology to which I have alluded, that
the more I have learned of each the more thoroughly do
I realise the impassibility of the gulf between material
�10
WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
motion and mental process, that Body and Mind, however
closely intermingled, are twain, not one.
Let us look a little further into the functions of Mind,
as e.g., Memory. How does the Materialist explain the
phenomena of Memory ? A cell, or group of cells, has
been set vibrating • hence a thought. Similar vibrations
are continually being set up, and every cell in the cere
brum must have been set vibrating millions of times
during infancy, youth, and maturity. The man of fifty
remembers a scene of his childhood; that is, a group of
cells—every atom of which has been changed several
times since the scene occurred—sets up a certain series of
vibrations which reproduces the original series, or let us
say the chief of the original series, and so gives rise to the
remembrance, the vibration being prior in time, necessarily,
to the remembrance. I will not press the further diffi
culty, as to the initiation of this motion and the complexi
ties of “Association” in intensifying vibration so as to
bring the thought above the threshold of consciousness..
It will suffice to try and realise what is implied in the
setting up of this series of vibrations, each cell vibrating
in conjunction with its fellows as it vibrated forty years
before, despite the myriad other combinations ^possible,
each one of which would cause other thought. \_A wellstored memory contains thousands of “thought pictures” ;
each of these must have its vibratory cell-series in the- k.
human cerebrum. Is this possible, having regard to the
laws of space and time, to which, be it remembered, cell
vibrations are subject ?
But these difficulties are on the surface ; let us go a stepfurther. In dealing with psychology, we must study the
abnormal as well as the normal. Normally, thought
results from sense-impression ; abnormally, sense-impres
sion may result from thought. Thus, a young officer was
told off to exhume the corpse of a person some time buried ;
as the coffin came into view the effluvium was so over
powering that he fainted. Opened, the coffin was found
to be empty. It was the vivid imagination of the young
man that had created the sense-impression, for which there
was no objective cause. Again, a novelist, absorbed in
his plot, in which one of his characters was killed by
arsenic, showed symptoms of arsenical poisoning. Here
the mouth, oesophagus and stomach were affected by a
�WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
11
cause that existed only in the mind. I have failed to find
any Materialist explanation of a large group of phsenomena,
of which these are types.
Take again the extraordinary keenness of perception
found in some cases of disease. A patient suffering from
one of certain disorders will hear words spoken at a distance
far beyond that of ordinary audition. It seems as though
the lowering of muscular power and of general vitality
coincided with the intensifying of the perceptive faculties
—a fact difficult to explain from the Materialist stand
point, though the explanation saute aux yeux from the
Theosophical, as will be seen further on.
Or consider the phsenomenaof clairvoyance, clairaudience,
and thought-transference. Here, if a person be thrown
into an abnormal nerve condition, he can see and hear at
distances which preclude normal vision and audition. A
clairvoyant will read with eyes bandaged, or with a board
interposed between reader and book. He will follow the
closed or opened hand of the mesmeriser, and give its
position and condition. Here, I do not give special in
stances, as the cases are legion and are easily accessible to
anyone who desires to investigate. A large number of
careful experiments have put cases of thought-transference
beyond possibility of reasonable denial, and can be referred
to by the student. I cannot burden this short pamphlet
with them, especially as it is merely intended as a tracing
of the road along which I have travelled, not as an
exposition of the whole case against Materialism.
Mesmerism and hypnotism, again, suggest the existence
in man of faculties which are normally latent. All sense
perception in the mesmerised is overcome by the will of
the mesmeriser, who imposes on him “ sense-perceptions ”
antagonistic to facts : e.g., he will drink water with enjoy
ment as wine, with repugnance as vinegar, etc. The body
is mastered by the mind of another, and responds as the
operator wills. Experiments in hypnotism have yielded
the most astounding results; actions commanded by the
hypnotiser being performed by the person hypnotised,
although the two were separated by distance, and though
some time had elapsed since the hypnotic operation had
been performed, and the person hypnotised restored
apparently to the normal conditions. (See the experi
ments of Dr. Charcot and others.) So serious have been
�WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
‘ the results of these experiments that a society is now in
course of formation in London, which seeks to restrict the
practice of hypnotism to the medical profession and persons
duly and legally qualified to practice it. “For this pur
pose”, says the acting Secretary, “it is proposed to found
8» school of hypnotism in London, at which the science will
be properly taught by the best exponents, scientifically
j demonstrated by lecture and experiment, and its beneficial
uses correctly defined and expounded”. Dr. Charcot has
used hypnotism in the place of anaesthetics, and has
i successfully performed a dangerous operation on a hypnoi tised patient, whose heart was too weak to permit the use
«of chloroform. Dr. Grillot uses it for “ moral cures ”, and
. hypnotises dishonest persons into honesty. A congress on
LiJi
.subject is sitting in Paris, while this pamphlet is
passing through the press.
i Allied to these are the phenomena of double-consciousL ness, many records of which are preserved in medical
K works ; here, in some cases, a double life has been led, no
memory, of one state existing in the other, and each life on
re-entering a state being taken up where it was dropped
on leaving it. With only one brain to function, how can
this duality of consciousness be explained ? Hallucinations,
visions of all kinds, again, do not seem to me to be re
ducible under any purely Materialist hypothesis : “ matter
and motion ” do not solve these phenomena of the psychic
world.
Another riddle in psychology is that of dreams. If
thought be the result only of molecular vibration, how
can dreams occur in which many successive events and
prolonged arguments occupy but a moment of time ?
Vibrations, I again remind the reader, are subject to the
conditions of space and time. Succession of thoughts
must imply succession of vibrations on the Materialist
hypothesis, and vibrations take time; yet thousands of
these, which, waking, would occupy days and weeks, are
compressed into a second in a dream.
Quite another class of phenomena is that in which
abilities are manifested for which no sufficient cause can
be discovered. Infant prodigies, like Hofmann and others,
whence come they ? We know what the brain of a very
young child is like, and we find young Hofmann impro
vising with a scientific knowledge that he has not had
�WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
13
time to acquire in the ordinary way. “ Genius ”, we say,
with our fashion of pretending to explain by using a
word; but how can Materialism, which will have matter
give birth to thought, find in the newly-made brain of
this child the cerebral modifications necessary for pro
ducing his melodies ? And when a servant in a farmhouse,
ignorant in her waking hours, talks Hebrew in her sleep,
how are we to regard her brain from the Materialist
Standpoint ? Or when the calculating boy answers a com
plex calculation when the words are barely out of the
questioner’s mouth, how have the cells performed their
duties ? a problem that becomes the more puzzling when
we find that the increase of circulation, etc., which
normally accompany brain activity, have not, in his case,
Occurred.
These are only a few riddles out of many, but they are
samples of the bulk. To some of us they are of over
powering interest, because they seem to suggest dimly
new fields of thought, new possibilities of development,
new heights which Humanity shall hereafter scale. We
do not believe that the forces of Evolution are exhausted.
We do not believe that the chapter of Progress is closed.
When a new sense was developing in the past its reports
at first must have been very blundering, often very mis
leading, doubtless very ridiculous at times, but none the
less had it the promise of the future, and was the germ of
a higher capacity. May not some new sense be developing
to-day, of which the many abnormal manifestations around
us are the outcome? Who, with the past behind him,
shall dare to say, “ It cannot be ” ? and who shall dare to
blame those whose longing to know may be but the yearn
ing of the Spirit of Humanity to rise to some higher
plane ?
The Theosophical Society.
Before showing the method suggested in Theosophical
teachings for obtaining light on the above questions, or
sketching the view of the universe given by occult science,
it may be well to remove some misconceptions concerning
the Theosophical Society, my adhesion to which has brought
on my devoted head such voluminous upbraiding. I fear
that the objects of the Society will come somewhat as an
�14
WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
anti-climax after the denunciations. They are three in
number, and any one who asks for admittance to the
Society must approve the first of these :
1. To be the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood.
2. To promote the. study of Aryan and other Eastern
literatures, religions, and sciences.
3. To investigate unexplained laws of nature and the
psychical powers latent in man.
Nothing more! Not a word of any form of belief; no
imposition of any special views as to the universe or man ;
nothing about Mahatmas, cycles, Karma or anything else.’
Atheist and Theist, Christian and Hindu, Mahommedan
and Secularist, all can meet on this one broad platform
and none has the right to look askance at another.
The answer to the inquiry, “Why did you join the
Society ? ” is very simple. There is sore need, it seems to
me, m our unbrotherly, anti-social civilisation, of this dis
tinct affirmation of a brotherhood as broad as Humanity
itself. Granted that it is as yet but a beautiful Ideal, it
is well that such an Ideal should be lifted up before the
eves of men. Not only so, but each who affirms that ideal,
and tries to conform thereto his own life, does something,
however little, to lift mankind towards its realisation, to
hasten the coming of that Day of Man. Again, the third
object is one that much attracts me. The desire for know
ledge is wrought deep into the heart of every earnest
student, and for many years the desire to search out the
forces that lie latent in and around us has been very
present to me. I can see in that desire nothing unworthy
of a Freethinker, nothing to be ashamed of as a searcher
after truth. “We seek for Truth” is the motto of the
National Secular Society, and that motto, to me, has been
no lip-phrase.
Beyond this, the membership of the Theosophical
Society does not bind its Fellows. They can remain
attached to any religious or non-religious views they may
have previously held, without challenge or question from
any. They may become students of Theosophy if they
choose, and develop into Theosophists; but this is above
and beyond the mere membership of the Society.
This fact, well known to all members of the Society,
shows how unjust was the attack on Mdme. Blavatsky,
�WHY I BECAME A THEOSOBHIST.
15
accusing her of inconsistency because she said, there was
nothing to prevent Mr. Bradlaugh from joining the Theo-sophical Society. There is nothing in the objects to
prevent anyone from joining who believes, as do all
Atheists, I think, in the Brotherhood of Man.
While this pamphlet is passing through the press a
curious judicial decision on the status of the Society
reaches me from America. A Branch Society at St. Louis
applied for a Decree of Incorporation, and in ordinary
•course the Report, based on sworn testimony, was delivered
to the court by its own officer, and on this the decree was
issued. The Report found that the Society was not a
religious but an educational body; it “has no religious
creed, and practises no worship”. The Report then pro
ceeded to deal with the Third Object of the Society, and
found that among the phenomena investigated were
“Spiritualism, mesmerism, clairvoyance, mind-healing,
mind-reading, and the like. I took testimony on this
question, and found that while a belief in any one of
these sorts of manifestations and phsenomena is not re
quired, while each member of the Society is at liberty to
hold his own opinion, yet such questions form topics of
enquiry and discussion, and the members as a mass are
probably believers individually in phenomena that are
abnormal and in powers that are superhuman as far as
science now knows.” Perhaps those Secularists who have
been so eager to credit me with beliefs that I have not
dreamed of holding, will accept this deliverance of a court
of justice, as they evidently refuse to take my word, as to
the conditions of membership in the Theosophical Society.
When, for instance, I find Mr. Foote in the Freethinker
crediting me with belief in the “ transmigration of souls”,
I can but suppose that he is moved rather by a desire to
discredit me than by a desire for truth. Indeed, the head
long jumping at unfavorable conclusions, and the outcry
raised against me, have been a most painful awakening
from the belief that Freethinkers, as such, would be less
bigoted and unjust than the ordinary Christian sectary.
The Report proceeds: “Theobject of this Society, whether
attainable or not, is undeniably laudable. Assuming that
there are physical and psychical phenomena unexplained,
Theosophy seeks to explain them. Assuming that there
are human powers yet latent, it seeks to discover them. It
�16
WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
maybe that absurdsties and impostures are in fact incident to
the nascent stage of its development. As to an undertaking
like Occultism, which asserts powers commonly thought
superhuman, and phenomena commonly thought super
natural, it seemed to me that the Court, though not as
suming to determine judicially the question of their verity
would, before granting to Occultism a franchise, enquire
at least whether it had gained the position of being reput
able, or whether its adherents were merely men of narrow
intelligence, mean intellect, and omnivorous credulity. I
accordingly took testimony on that point, and find that a
number of gentlemen in different countries of Europe, and
also in this country, eminent in science, are believers in
Occultism............ The late President Wayland, of Brown
University, writing of abnormal mental operations as shown
in clairvoyance, says : ‘ The subject seems to me well
worthy of the most searching and candid examination. It
is by no means deserving of ridicule, but demands the
attention of the most philosophical enquiry.’ Sir William
Hamilton, probably the most acute, and undeniably the
most learned of English metaphysicians that ever lived,
said at least thirty years ago : ‘ However astonishing, it
is now proved beyond all rational doubt,' that in certain
abnormal states of the nervous organism perceptions are
possible through other than the ordinary channels of
the senses.’ By such testimony Theosophy is at least
placed on the footing of respectability. Whether
by further labor it can make partial truths complete
truths, whether it can eliminate extravagances and
purge itself of impurities, if there are any, are pro
bably questions upon which the Court will not feel called
upon to pass.”
On this official Report the Charter of Incorporation was
granted, and it may be that some, reading this gravely
recorded opinion, will pause ere they join in the ignorant
outcry of “ superstition ” raised against me for joining the
Theosophical Society. Every new truth is born into the
world amid yells of hatred, but it is not Freethinkers
who should swell the outburst, nor ally themselves with
the forces of obscurantism to revile investigation into
nature.
�WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
17
Theosophy.
It may, however, be granted that most of those who •
enter the Theosophical Society do so because they have
some sympathy with the teachings of Theosophy, some
hope of finding new light thrown on the problems that
perplex them. Such members become students of Theo
sophy, and later many become Theosophists.
The first thing they learn is that every idea of the
existence of the supernatural must be surrendered. What- 1
ever forces may be latent in the Universe at large or in
man in particular, they are wholly natural. There is no :
such thing as miracle. Phsenomena may be met with that ar© strange, that seem inexplicable, but they are all
within the realm of law, and it is only our ignorance that
makes them marvellous. This repudiation of the super
natural lies at the very threshold of Theosophy: the
supersensuous, the superhuman, Yes; the supernatural,
No.
[I may here make a momentary digression to remark
that some students quickly fall back disappointed because '
they have come to the study of Theosophy with conceptions ■
drawn from theological religions of supernatural powers to be promptly acquired in some indefinite way. We shall •
see that Theosophy alleges the existence of powers greater
than those normally exercised by man, and alleges further
that these powers can be developed. But just because
there is nothing miraculous, or supernatural, about them
they cannot be suddenly obtained. A student of mathe
matics might as well expect to be able to work out a
problem in the differential calculus as soon as he can
Struggle through a simple equation, as a student of Theo
sophy expect to exercise occult faculties when he has
mastered a few pages of the “Secret Doctrine”. A
beginner may come into contact with someone whose
ordinary life occasionally shows in a perfectly simple and
natural way the possession of abnormal powers ; but he
must himself keep to his ABC for awhile, and possess L
his soul in patience.]
The next matter impressed on the student is the denial '■
of a personal God, and hencej as Mme. Blavatsky has
pointed out, Agnostics and Atheists more easily assimilate ’
�18
WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
Theosophic teachings than do believers in orthodox creeds.
In theology, Theosophy is Pantheistic, “ God is all and
all is God”. “It is that which is dissolved, or the illusionary dual aspect of That, the essence of which is
eternally One, that we call eternal matter or substance,
formless, sexless, inconceivable, even to our sixth sense,
or mind, in which, therefore, we refuse to see that which
Monotheists call apersonal anthropomorphic God.” (“Secret
Doctrine ”, vol. i, p. 545.) The essential point is : “ What
lies at the root of things, ‘ blind force and matter or an
existence which manifests itself in ‘ intelligence ’ to use a
very inadequate word ? Is the universe built up by
aggregation of matter acted on by unconscious forces,
finally evolving mind as a function of matter : or is it the
unfolding of a Divine Life, functioning in every form of
living and non-living thing ? Is Life or Non-life at the
core of things ? Is ‘ spirit ’ the flower of ‘ matter or
‘ matter ’ the crystallisation of ‘ spirit ’ ? ” Theosophy
accepts the second of these pairs of alternatives, and this,
among other reasons, because Materialism gives no answer
to the riddles in psychology, of which I gave some samples
above, whereas Pantheism does ; and the hypothesis which
includes most facts under it has the greatest claim for
acceptance. On the plane of matter, materialistic Science
answers many questions and promises to answer more;
on the plane of mind she breaks down, and continually
murmurs “ Insoluble, unknowable ”. On the other hand,
assuming intelligence as primal, the developed and dawn
ing faculties of the human mind fall into intelligible order,
and can be studied with hope of comprehension. At any
rate, where Materialism confesses itself incapable, no blame
can be attached to the student if he seek other method for
solving the problem, and if he test the methods offered to
him by some who claim to have solved it, and who prove,
by actual experiment, that their knowledge of natural
laws in the domain of psychology, and outside it, is greater
than his own. So far, however, as Theosophy is concerned
in its acceptance of the Pantheistic hypothesis, it is not
necessary to make any long defence. Pantheism, for
which Bruno died and Spinoza argued, need not seek to
justify its existence in the intellectual world.
The theory of the Universe which engages the attention
of the student of Theosophy comes to him on the authority
�WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
19
of certain individuals, as does every other similar theory,
religious or scientific. But while all such theories are put
forward by individuals, there is this broad difference
between the tone of the priest and that of the scientific
teacher: one claims to rest on authority outside verifica
tion; the other submits its authority to verification. One
gays: “Believe, or be damned; you must have faith.”
The other says: “Things are thus; I have investigated
and proved them ; many of my demonstrations are incom
prehensible to you in your present state of ignorance, and
I cannot even make them intelligible to you off-hand ; but
if you will study as I have studied, you can discover for
yourself, and you can personally verify all my statements.”
The Theosophical theory of the Universe comes into the
latter category. The student is not even asked to accept it
any faster than he can verify it. On the other hand, if he
choose to be satisfied with the credentials of its teachers,
pending the growth of his own capacity to investigate, he
can accept the theory and guide his own life by it. In the
latter case his progress will be more rapid than in the
former, but the matter is in his own hands and his freedom
is unfettered.
I have spoken of “ its teachers ”, and it will be well to
explain the phrase at the outset. These teachers belong
to a Brotherhood, composed of men of various nationalities,
who have devoted their lives to the study of Occultism and
have developed certain faculties which are still latent in
ordinary human beings. On such subjects as’the con
stitution of man, they claim to speak with knowledge, as
Huxley would speak on man’s anatomy, and for the same
reason, that they have analysed it. So again as to the
existence of various types of living things, unknown to us:
they allege that they see and know them, as we see and
know the types by which we are surrounded. They say
further that they can train other men and women, and
show them how to acquire similar powers: they cannot
give the powers, but can only help others in developing
them, for they are a part of human nature, and must be
evolved from within, not bestowed from without.
Now it is obvious that, while the teachings of Theosophy
might simply stand before the world on their own feet, to
meet with acceptance or rejection on their inherent merits
And demerits, as they deal largely with questions of fact,
�20
WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
they must depend on the evidence whereby they are sup
ported, and, at the outset, very largely on the competenceof the persons who give them to the world. The existence
of these teachers, and their possession of powers beyond
those exercised by ordinary persons, become then of crucial
importance. Were the powers to Be taken as miraculous,
and were they apart from the subject matter of their teach
ings, I cannot see that they would be of any value as
evidence in support of those teachings; but if they depend
on the accuracy of the views enunciated and demonstrate
those views, then they become relevant and evidential, asthe experiments of a skilled electrician elucidate his views
and demonstrate his theories.
We, therefore, are bound to ask, ere going any further:
do these teachers exist ? do they possess these (at present)
exceptional powers ?
The answers to these questions come from different
classes of people with different weight. Those who have
seen the Hindus among them in their own country,
talked with them, been instructed by them, corres
ponded with them, have naturally no more doubt of
their existence than they have of the existence of
other persons whom they have met. Persons who are
interested in the matter can see these people, crossexamine them, and form their own conclusions as to the
value of their evidence. A large number of people, of
whom I am one, believe in the existence of these teachers
on secondhand evidence, that is, on the evidence of those
who know them personally. And this evidence receives a
collateral support when one meets with quiet matter-ofcourse exercise of abnormal faculties, in every day life, on
the part of one alleged to be trained by these very men.
A deception kept up for months with absolute consistency
through all the small details of ordinary intercourse, with
out parade and without concealment, is not a defensible
hypothesis. And it becomes ludicrous to anyone who, in
familiar intercourse, has noted the quick, impulsive, open
character of the much abused and little-known Mdme.
Blavatsky, as frank as a child about herself, and speaking
of her own experiences, her own blunders, her own ad
ventures, with a naive abandon that carries with it a convic
tion of her truth. (I am speaking of her, of course, among
her friends; in face of strangers she can be silent and secret
�WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
21
■•enough.) It should be added that personal proof of the exist
ence of these teachers is given sooner or later to earnest
«indents, just as, in studying any science, a student after
awhile is able to obtain ocular demonstration of the facts
he learns secondhand. On the other hand, those who feel
that they have attained all possible knowledge and that
. nothing exists of which they are not aware, can deny the
-existence of these teachers and maintain, as stoutly as they
please, that they are a dream, a fancy. 11 The Masters ”,
«8 the students of Theosophy call them, are not anxious
for an introduction, and they are not, like the orthodox
God, angry with any who deny their existence. Shocking
as it may seem to nineteenth century self-sufficiency, they
are indifferent to its declaration that they are non-existent,
a.nd are in no wise eager to demonstrate to all and sundry
that they live. Let it, however, be clearly understood that
these teachers have nothing supernatural about them;
they are men who have studied a particular subj ect and
have become “ masters ” in it—Mahatmas, Great Souls,
tike Hindus call them—and who, because they know, can
do things that ignorant people cannot do.
From these Masters then, say Theosophists, we derive
-our teachings, and you will find, if you examine them,
that they throw light on the nature of man and guide him
along the path to a higher life. Man, according to Theo
sophy, is a compound being, a spark of the Universal
Spirit being prisoned in his body, as a flame in the lamp.
The u higher Triad” in man consists of this spark of the
Universal Spirit, its vehicle the human spirit, and the
v rational principle, the mind or intellectual powers. This
is immortal, indestructible, using the lower Quaternary,
• the body, with its animal life, its passions and appetites,
as its dwelling, its organ. Thus we reach the famous
«even-fold division, or the “seven principles” in man:
Atma, the Universal spirit; Buddhi, the human spirit;
Manas, the rational soul; Kamarupa, the animal soul with
its appetites and passions; Prana, the vitality, the principle
-Of life; Linga Sharira, the vehicle of this life ; Pupa, the
physical body. Theosophy teaches that the higher Triad
and lower Quaternary are not only separable at death, but
may be temporarily separated during life, the intellectual
part of man leaving the body and its attached principles,
and appearing apart from them. This is the much talked
�22
WHY I BECAME A THE030PHIST.
of “astral appearance”, and its reality can only be decided
by evidence, like any other matter of fact. Those whoknow nothing about it will, of course, deride belief in it
as superstition, as people like-minded with them derided
in the past each newly discovered power in nature. Hero
again, after awhile, the student has ocular demonstration,
and, when he reaches a certain stage, personal experience;
but, if he is dissatisfied with second-hand evidence, no
blame will fall on him for suspending his belief until he
obtains personal proof.
Clairvoyance and allied phenomena become intelligibleon this view of man, the projection of the human intelli
gence, while the body is in a state of trance, taking its
place as one of the temporary separations alluded to. The
Ego, thus freed, can exercise its faculties apart from thelimitations of the physical senses, and has escaped from
the time and space limits which are created by our normal
consciousness. It is noteworthy that persons emerging
from the mesmeric state have no memory of what has
occurred during that state; i.e., no impress has been left
on the physical organism by the experiences passed
through. But if the seeing or hearing is by the way
of the external senses, this could not be, for the cere
bral activity would have left its trace on the cerebral
material.
If, on the other hand, the experiences have been
supersensuous, there can be no reason to look for their
record in the sense-centres; and the outcome of the
experiment is merely the fact that, under these conditions,
the Ego is powerless to impress on the physical frame the
memory of its actions. So long, indeed, as the lower
nature is more vigorous than the higher, this impotency of
the Ego will continue ; and it is only as the higher nature
developes and takes the upper hand in the alliance, that
the physical consciousness will become impressible by it.
This stage has been reached by many, and then conscious
ness becomes unified, and higher and lower work in
harmony under the control of the will.
The weakening of tue body by disease sometimes brings
about, but in an undesirable way, a temporary supremacy
of the Higher Self, resulting in that keenness of percep
tion referred to on page 11. To obtain such keennessnormally, without injury to health, it would be necessary
�WHY I BECAME A THEO SOPHIST.
23
to refine and purify the physical organisation, and this,
among other things, may be effected in due course.
On the existence of this separable and indestructible
entity, the Ego, hinge the doctrines of Ee-incarnation and
Karma. Ee-incarnation—ignorantly travestied as transmi
gration of souls—is the rebirth of the Ego, as above defined,
to pass through another human life on earth. . During
its past incarnation it had acquired certain faculties, set in
motion certain causes. The effects of these, causes, and
of causes set in motion in previous incarnations and. not
yet exhausted, are its Karma, and determine the con
ditions into which the Ego is reborn, the conditions being
modified, however, by the national Karma, the outcome of
the collective life. The faculties acquired in previous
incarnations manifest themselves in the new life, and
genius, abnormal capacities of any kind, possession of
knowledge not acquired during the present existence, and
so on, are explained by Theosophy on this theory of re
incarnation. Infant prodigies, calculating boys, et hoc genus
omne, fall into order in quite natural fashion instead , of
rom ni ni ng as inexplicable phænomena. Erom the point
of view of Theosophy, nothing is lost in the Universe, no
force is extinguished. Faculties and capacities painfully
acquired during the long course of years do not perish at
death. When, after long sleep, the time for rebirth
comes, the Ego does not re-enter earth-life as a pauper ;
he returns with the fruits of his past victories, to make
further progress upwards.
The only proof of this doctrine, apart from the explana
tion it gives of the otherwise inexplicable cases of genius,
etc., and its inherent probability—given any intelligent
purpose in human existence—must, in the nature of
things, lie for us in the future if it exist at all; the
Masters allege it on their personal knowledge, having
reached the stage at which memory of past incarnations
revives ; the doctrine comes to us on their authority, and
must be accepted or rejected by each as it approves itself
to his reason.
Similarly the working of the law of Karma cannot be
demonstrated as can a problem in mathematics. The law
of Karma has been defined by Colonel Olcott as the law of
ethical causation ; Theosophists affirm that the harvest
reaped by man is of his own sowing, and that, although
�¡24
WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
not always immediately, yet inevitably, every act must
work out its full results. We may argue to this law in
. the mental and moral worlds, by analogy from the physical.
Each force on the physical plane has its own result, and
. where many forces interact, each has, none the less, its
complete effect. On the higher planes, since the Universe
is one, we may reasonably look for similar laws, and one
of these laws is Karma. That it will be difficult to trace
its exact working in any instance lies in the nature of the
case. We may see a body rushing in a given direction,
and we know that the line along which it is travelling is
the resultant of all the forces that have impelled it; but
that resultant may have been caused, by any one of a
thousand combinations, and in default of the knowledge
of the whole history of its motion we cannot select one
combination and say, such and such are the forces. How
then can we expect to perform such a feat in the more
complicated interplay of all the Karmic forces that ultimate
m the character and environment of an individual ? The
general principle can be laid down; for the working out
of a particular case in detail we have not the material.
One. of my critics, Mr. G. W. Foote, asks me how I can
reconcile Karma with Socialism, and he affirms that the
Socialist, and “every social reformer, is fighting against
Karma”.. Not so in any effective sense. To bring fresh
forces to improve , the present is not to deny the effects of
past causes, but is only to introduce new causes which
shall modify present effects and change the future. It
may well be. that the present poverty, misery, and disease
spring inevitably from past evil, and this all scientific
thinkers must admit, whether or not they use the word
Karma; but that is no reason why we should not start
forces of wisdom and love to change them, and create
good Karma for the future instead of continuing to create
bad. By every action we modify the present and mould
the future; that the past has created so evil an heritage
but makes the need the sorer for strenuous effort now.
It must be remembered that Karma is not a personal
Deity, against whose will it might be thought blasphemous
to contend. It is simply a law, like any other law of
nature, and we cannot violate it even if we would. But it
110 more prevents us from aiding our fellow-men than
“the law of gravitation” prevents us from walking up.
�WHY I-BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
25
^■stairs. We. cannot prevent a man from suffering physical
pain if he breaks his leg, but the law of nature that pain
. follows lesion of sensitive tissues does not hinder us from
nursing the sufferer and alleviating the pain as much as
possible. Neither can we save a man from the sway of
Karmic law, but there is nothing to prevent us from
trying to lighten his suffering, and above all from en
deavoring to put an end to the causes which are continually
generating such evil results. Does Mr. Foote deny that
all around us is the outcome of past causes ? or does he
.say that because there is causation we must sit with folded
hands in face of evil ? The true view, it seems to me, is
that as present conditions are the results of past activities,
. so future conditions will be the results of present activities,
and we had better bestir ourselves to the full extent of our
powers to set going causes that will work out happier
results.1
What belief in Karma does is to prevent mere idle and
useless repining, and to teach a dignified and virile accept
ance of inevitable suffering, while bracing the spirit to
sustained endeavor to improve the present and thus inevit
ably improve the future. Nor must it be forgotten that
courage to face pain, and love, and generous self-sacrifice
for others, are all of them Karmic fruits, effects of past
•causes and themselves causes of fature effects. The
religionist, who hopes to escape from the consequences of
his own misdeeds through some side-door of vicarious
atonement, may shrink from the stern enunciation of the
law of Karma, but the Secularist who believes in the
reign of law can have no quarrel on this head with the
Theosophist. Difference can only arise when the Theosophist says: “You must pay every farthing of the debt
run up, either in this or in some future incarnation ”. The
non-Theosophical Secularist would consider that death
cancels all debts. To the Theosophist death merely sus
pends the payment, and the full undischarged account is
, presented to the dead man’s successor, who is himself in a
new dress.
Theosophy further teaches, in connexion with man,
1 See an article, “Karma and Social Improvement”, by the present
writer, in Lucifer for August, 1889. The question is there more
fully worked out.
�26
WHY I BECAME A THE0S0PHI8T.
that he may develope by suitable means not only the
psychic qualities of which glimpses are given in the ab
normal manifestations before alluded to, but power over
matter far. greater than he at present possesses, and
psychic abilities in comparison with which those now
looming before us are but as the capacities of infants to
those of grown men. In the slow evolution of the human
race these qualities will gradually unfold themselves;
further, they may be, so to say, “forced” by any who
choose to take the requisite means. And here comes in
the asceticism to which Mr. Foote so vehemently objects ;
he . declares that the acceptance of celibacy by an
individual for a definite object implies that “ Marriage is
now a mere concession to human weakness. Celibacy is
the counsel of perfection. The sacred names of husband
and wife, father and mother, are to be deposed as usurpers.
At the very best they are only to be tolerated. It is idle
to reply that celibacy is only for the ‘inner circle’. If it
be. the loftiest rule of life, it should be aimed at by all.”
With all due respect to Mr. Foote, his denunciation savors
somewhat of clap-trap, though well calculated to appeal to
the ordinary British Philistine of Mr. Matthew Arnold.
No one wants to depose any names, sacred or otherwise,
as usurpers. It sounds rather small after this tremendous
objurgation, but all the Theosophist says is, if you want to
obtain a certain thing you must use certain means; as who
should say, if you want to swim across that swift current
you must take off your coat. But if it be good, should
not everyone try for it ? Not necessarily. Music is very
good, but I should be a fool to practise eight hours a day
if I had but small talent for it; if I have great talent, and
want to become a great artist, I must sacrifice for it many
of the ordinary j oys of life; but is that to say that every
boy and girl must fling aside every duty of life and practise
incessantly, without the slightest regard to anything else ?
Only one out of millions has the capacity for that swift
development to which allusion is made, and celibacy is one
of the smallest of the sacrifices it demands for its realisa
tion. The spiritual genius, like other geniuses, will have
its way, but Mr. Foote need not fear that it will become
too common, and Theosophy does not advise celibacy to
those not on fire with its flame.
I ought perhaps in passing to say a word as to the
�WHY I BECAME A THEOSOEHIST.
27
power over matter spoken of above, because a good deal
of fuss, quite out of proportion to their importance, hasbeen made about the “phenomena” with which Mdme.
Blavatsky’s name has been associated, and many peoplo
assume that it is pretended that they are “miracles ., or
are a phase of “ Spiritualistic manifestations . The bitter
attacks made on Mdme. Blavatsky by Spiritualists ought
to convince unprejudiced people that she has not.much m
common with them. As a matter of fact, her main object
in the greater number of cases, as she said at the time,
was to show that far more remarkable things than were
done among Spiritualists by “spirits” in the dark, could
be done in full daylight without any “ spirits ”, merely by
the utilisation of natural forces. All that she. claimed was
that she knew more about these forces than did the people
about her, and could therefore do things which they could
not. A good many of the apparent miracles turned merely
on the utilisation of magnetic force, a force about the
•marvels of which science is finding out more year after
year. Mdme. Blavatsky is able to utilise this force, which
everyone admits is around us, in us, and in non-living
things, without the apparatus used at the present time by
science for its manipulation. Other of the phenomena
were what she called “psychological tricks , illusions,
conjuring on the mental plane as does the ordinary
conjurer on the material, making people see what you
wish them to see instead of what really is. Others, again,
were cases of thought-transference. Another group, that
including the disintegration and reintegration of material
objects, is more difficult to understand. All I can say
myself as to this is that when I find a person, who leads a
good and most laborious life, and who exercises powers
that I do not possess, telling me that this can be done and
has been done within her own knowledge in a perfectly
natural way, I am not going to say “ deception ”,
“ charlatanry ”, merely because I do not understand; any
more than I should say so if Tyndall told me of one of his
wonderful experiments, as to which I did not understand
the modus operandi.
There remains a great stumbling-block in the minds of
many Freethinkers, which is certain to prejudice them
against Theosophy, and which offers to opponents a cheap
Subject for sarcasm—the assertion that there exist other
�28
WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
living beings than the men and animals found on our own
globe. It may be well for people who at once turn away
when such an assertion is made to stop and ask themselves
whether they really and seriously believe that throughout
this mighty universe,. in which our little planet is but as
a. tiny speck of sand in the Sahara, this one planet only is
inhabited by living things ? Is all the Universe dumb
save for our voices ? eyeless, save for our vision ? dead,
save for. our life ? Such a preposterous belief was well
enough in the days when Christianity regarded our world
as the centre of the universe, the human race as the one
for which the creator had deigned to die. But now that
we are placed in our proper position, one among countless
myriads of worlds, what ground is there for the pre
posterous conceit which arrogates as ours all sentient
-existence ? Earth, air, water, all are teeming with living
things suited to their environment; our globe is over
flowing with life. But the moment we pass in thought
beyond our atmosphere everything is to be changed.
Neither reason nor analogy support such a supposition.
It was one of Bruno’s crimes that he dared to teach that
other worlds than ours were inhabited, but he was wiser
than the monks who burned him. All the Theosophist
avers is that each phase of matter has living things suited
to it, and. that all the Universe is pulsing with life.
“Superstition” shriek the bigoted. It is no more super
stition than the belief in Bacteria, or in any other living
thing invisible to the ordinary human eye. “ Spirit ” is a
misleading word, for, historically, it connotes immateriality
and a supernatural kind of existence, and the Theosophist
believes neither in the one nor the other. With him all living
things act in and through a material basis, and “ matter ”
and ‘ ‘ spirit ’ ’ are not found dissociated. But he alleges
that matter exists in states other than those at present
known to science. To deny this is to be about as sensible
as was the Hindu prince who denied the existence of ice,
because water in his experience never became solid.
Refusal to believe until proof is given is a rational
position; denial of all outside our own limited experience
is absurd.
�WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
29-
Minute®.
Before closing this explanatory pamphlet I must allude
to the kind of weapons being used against me by one or
two writers in the Freethinker. I speak of it here, because
I have no other way of answering the paragraphs which
appear in that journal week after week, and I will take
two or three as specimens of a kind of controversy which
JS not, I venture to think, worthy of the Freethought cause.
“ Mrs. Besant goes in for the transmigration of souls ”,
then follows an absurd statement about the souls of
ill-behaving Hindu wives passing into various animals.
This assertion is worse than a caricature, it is a misrepre
sentation; and as I am told that Mr. Wheeler “knows
more about Buddhism and Oriental thought generally than
Mrs. Besant is ever likely to learn ”, I cannot suppose
that the misrepresentation springs from ignorance. No
Theosophist believes in the transmigration of souls, or that
the human Ego can enter a lower animal; and a blunder
that might pass from an ignoramus is not excusable where
such great professions of learning are made. I take the
above statement as a type of the caricatures of Theosophy
to be found in the Freethinker.
There are other paragraphs which give a false idea by
suppression of part of the truth. Thus : Mr. Foote states
that si we do not intend to open our columns for the dis
cussion of Theosophy” (although he had attacked it), and
saying that he was going to publish a letter from a
Theosophist, he adds : “ The Theosophists must not expect
to use our columns any further. Mr. Wheeler reviewed
Mdme. Blavatsky’s book on its being sent to him for that
purpose, and it is not customary to discuss reviews.”
Butting aside the fact that Mr. Wheeler’s article was an
attack on Theosophy and on Mdme. Blavatsky personally,
rather than a review of the “ Secret Doctrine”, the above
sentence implies that the criticism of the Freethinker was
challenged by the Theosophists sending the book. This
Was not so: Mr. Wheeler wrote saying that my adhesion
to Theosophy would cause interest in the subject to be felt
by Freethinkers, and asking for a copy of the book for
review. This was an unusual course to take as preface to
a,.bitter personal attack, but, waiving the question oh
�so,
WHY I BECAME A THEOSOPHIST.
literary courtesy, the point is that the initiative came from
the Freethinker, not from the Theosophists. It is not
■consistent with Freethought . traditions to gratuitously
attack a person and then decline discussion. Again, Mr.
Foote writes: “We do not agree with the Medium and
Daybreak that Mr. Foote should have treated Mrs. Besant’s
‘ apostacy with silent contempt.’ A very different treat
ment was called for by her character and past services to
the cause.” The words in inverted commas do occur in
the Medium and Daybreak, but the context considerably
alters the meaning suggested by them as quoted bv Mr.
Foote. The passage runs :
“‘Mrs. Besaxt’s Theosophy’ is the title of a 16-page
two-penny worth by G. W. Foote, in which ‘ the Freethought
party’ is an ominous phrase. Like the ‘Church’ it stands
high above truth, and Mrs. Besant is censured for treating it
so ‘ cavalierly ’. In view of the lady’s new style of propaganda,
Mr. Foote is anxious for the ‘interests of the free-thought
party’. If the ‘philosophy’ of that body be so ‘sound and
bracing.’, why the weakness of Mrs. Besant, and the dangerous
tendencies of her new views ? Mr. Foote would have shown
laudable consistency, and more no-faith, if he had treated her
■apostacy with silent contempt.”
Comment is needless.
Then we have a number of personal attacks on Madame
Blavatsky; has not Mr. Foote suffered enough from the
slanderous statements of opponents to hesitate before he
gives currency to malignant libels on another? What
would he think of me if I soiled these pages with a repeti
tion of the stories told against him by the lecturers of the
Christian Evidence Society? Yet he adopts this foul
weapon, against Madame Blavatsky. “ No case ; abuse
the plaintiff’s attorney.” How utterly careless Mr. Foote
is. in picking up any stone that he thinks may inflict some
slight injury is shown by the following paragraph :
“We learn on the authority of a Theosophist that Madame
Blavatsky is going abroad for a few months, and has confided
the presidentship of the Theosophical Society into the hands of
her new convert, Mrs. Besant.”
The matter is trivial enough—save for the ungenerous
attempt to make out that the Theosophical Society must
be hard up for adherents if it had to fall back on a new
member as acting President—but it happens that Madame
�WHY 1 BECAME A TIIEOSOPHIST.
31
Blavatsky is not the president of the Theosophical Society,
and has never held that position. No “ Theosophist ”
could have made such a blunder, but a sneer was wanted^
so accuracy was thrown to the winds.
My chief reason for drawing attention to these blunders
is to shew that I have some cause to ask Freethinkers not
to adopt, without examination, Mr. Foote’s statements
about the beliefs or the lives of Theosophists, but to
justify their name by making personal investigation before
they decide.
To Members
oe th?
National Secular Society.
One last word to my Secularist friends. If you say to
me, “ Leave our ranks ”, I will leave them ; I force myself
on no party, and the moment I feel myself unwelcome I
will go. It has cost me pain enough and to spare to admit
that the Materialism from which I hoped all has failed
me, and by such admission to bring upon myself the dis
approval of some of my nearest friends. But here, as at
other times in my life, I dare not purchase peace with a
lie. An imperious necessity forces me to speak the truth
as I see it, whether the speech please or displease, whether
it bring praise or blame. That one loyalty to Truth I
must keep stainless, whatever friendships fail me or human
ties be broken. She may lead me into the wilderness,
but I must follow her ; she may strip me of all love, but I
must pursue her; though she slay me, yet will I trust in
her; and I ask no other epitaph on my tomb, but
She tried to follow Truth.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Why I became a theosophist
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Besant, Annie Wood [1847-1933]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 31 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Printed by Annie Besant and Charles Bradlaugh. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Freethought Publishing Company
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1889
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N072
Subject
The topic of the resource
Theosophy
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Why I became a theosophist), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
NSS
Theosophy