H.S. OLCOTT vs. H.P.B.
In the April Theosophist Col. Olcott makes public what
we have long known to be his private opinion -a private opinion
at through the pages of Old Diary Leaves, -that H.P.B.
was a fraud, a medium, and a forger of bogus messages form the
Masters. This final ingrate's blow is delivered in a Postscript
to the magazine for which the presses were stopped. The hurry
was so great that he could not wait another month before hurling
the last handful of mud at his spiritual and material benefactor,
our departed H.P.B. The next prominent person for whom we wait
to make a similar public statement, has long made it privately.
Col. Olcott "stops the press" and rushes off the
Postscript, "for the honor of the Masters." He wishes
to defend those Masters, who sent H.P.B. as their messenger,
by declaring that she "cooked up," forged, and humbugged
with, a long and important message to Brahmans at Allahabad in
1881. The Colonel is H.P.B.'s first Western disciple, ignorant
to this day of practical occultism and not able to propound a
question to the Masters; never heard of Masters except through
H.P.B. He now preserves the honor of Masters by blackening the
character of their messenger. Splendid defence, this, of the
Masters!
How does he explain the long silence of the Masters since
1881 on the subject! And another very pertinent question is this:
How does this "defender of the Masters" explain his
own silence in 1881 and since? He was present when the message
was sent and knew of it. If he knew then that it was bogus why
did he not divulge? If he did not know then, was it because he
was unable to tell? If he has since been told by one of the Masters
-á la Besant in the Judge case- will he kindly let us
know which of the Masters told him, and when?
All these questions ought to be answered, and many proofs
given by him showing the least occult ability to decide on false
or genuine messages, because he has attempted to classify H.P.B.
with frauds, forgers and mediums. Hence the Masters who sent
her are put by him in similar categories. Observe that the forgery
now alleged by him was at the very time H.P.B. was giving out
from the Masters the series of messages which have become known
to all. If we believe him, then the delivery by this irresponsible
medium of one false message must throw doubt on every message.
Certainly Col. Olcott is no occultist whose decision we will
accept. Each of us will be left to decide for this, that, or
the other message according to our fancy. Olcott does not like
the one in question because he lives in India, and it is too
gallingly true. Perhaps others may like it, and not be willing
to accept other messages that contradict their partisan view
of the London Lodge papers or metaphysics and science. For my
part, the message in question testifies to its genuineness by
its text, except for those who are hit by it, or those who have
the Indian craze and think themselves Brahmans, or those whose
self-interest and comforts are against it.
The message condemns bigotry. The person to whom it was sent
were then of the most theologically bigoted families. They were
wondering, like Pharisees, how it was possible that the Mahatmas
could communicated with a beef-eating wine-drinking Sinnet and
not with them, who took no such things and never shook hands.
To these very points, to their superstitions, to their upholding
idolatry, to the horrors of caste, the letter adverts. The whole
letter rings true and strong. Were one at all disposed to join
Olcott in his absurd explanations by mediumship, this letter
is the one that would be selected as true.
If for a moment we accept this view of H.P.B. put forward
by Olcott then there is, as she published herself, no certainty
about any message. Who is to decide? If she hoodwinked with one
message, all may be the same -bogus-and the great force and strength
derived from a firm belief in Masters will be swept away, because
she, their first messenger to us, is made out a fraud. All this
is precisely what Olcott et al wish to do. He cannot tolerate
the idea that H.P.B. was greater than himself, so he throws around
her memory the dirty cloak of tricky and irresponsible mediumship.
That done, anything can be explained and anything accounted for.
Well, for my part, I will not accept such nonsense; Col. Olcott
being incompetent to decide on Mahatmic messages on occult lines,
and being a disciple of H.P.B. is certainly much below her. His
present utterance settles nothing about her character, about
her mediumship or about the message; but it does serve to brand
him as an ingrate and to place him plainly in view as one who
calls that great teacher a fraud and medium.
Now let the next and the next come on, so that we may have
the lines clearly drawn and the hypocrisies unveiled.
Mrs. A. Besant vs. H.P.B.
Mrs. Besant has sent an advance copy of an article to appear
in Lucifer entitled "East and West." It is a
very long article devoted chiefly to William Q. Judge, but in
it she takes up the message from the Master to the Allahabad
Brahmans, which Col. Olcott deals with in his April Postscript.
She says the message was not genuine, and thus walks beside
Col. Olcott in abuse of H.P.B., for everyone with correct information
knows that the message came through H.P.B.
William Q. Judge
Path, June 1895
Theosophy.org Home | up
| top |