H.P. Blavasky and the early Theosophical Society in
New York
Based on the available information, there is no doubt
that the Earlier Theosophical Society offered its members a system of secret
degrees. Dr. Santucci, the publisher of Theosophical History Quarterly,
suggested that the TS, in the beginning, had a Theurgist (ceremonial Magic)
character.
1875: The Theosophical Society was proposed and
organized.
1877 (September): Blavatsky’s Isis Unveiled was
published.
1878: The Theosophical Society converted from an
open to a secret society.
Yet W. J. Colville already wrote in 1884:
“Some years since, when a Theosophical Society was
started in New York, it was declared that it was necessary to take nine degrees
to qualify a member to enter into the full mysteries and powers of the order.”
Dr. Mathiesen writes: “There should be little doubt
that this system of degrees was connected with a specific program of
step-by-step training in occult or magical practices. In offering such a
program during 1875–1876.
Who were these high degree members, and what was the
program of occult training that they provided? Whenever this question has been
raised in the past, it has been tacitly assumed that there could have been only
one such member in the Early Theosophical Society, namely, H. P. Blavatsky
herself, and also that the Society‘s program of training would necessarily have
been under her sole direction. Undoubtedly she could have provided such
training and direction, and that she actually provided it to H. S. Olcott and
W.Q. The judge seems clear from the evidence as cited by Deveney.
Also, H. P. Blavatsky was not the only member of the
Early Theosophical Society who needs to be considered a high degree possible
occult trainer. Even from the little we know about them, it appears that George
H. Felt, Dr. Seth Pancoast, Charles Sotheran, and Albert Leighton Rawson were
also qualified, each in his own way, to instruct in one or another occult or
esoteric practice. In addition to these four men, Emma Hardinge Britten also
must be taken into consideration. Not only was she the sixth member to sign the
Society‘s Pledge of Secrecy.
A quarter of the founding members were Spiritualists,
and some of them were mediums as well. Yet she was much more than a medium; in
addition to the practical skills that she had acquired as a seer for the Orphic
Brotherhood in the 1830s (which employed crystals and mirrors, music, and
specially prepared fumigations as aids to clairvoyance, she had also received
instruction in its doctrines and practices from Louis de B— as early as 1850.”
(1)
After Felt failure (see Editorial 14 “Astral
Gymnastics”), the TS attempted to find a substitute, including the
commissioning of E.S. Spaulding, a member, in August 1876 to travel to Tunis
with some stranded “Arab” sailors “to find a real magician or sorcerer who
would consent to come to this country”…(Olcott‘s letter to E.S. Spaulding in
August 1876. See also “Those Desolate Arabs. A Member of the Theosophical
Society Who Accompanied Them Home is Required to Accomplish, “Banner of Light”
29/20, August 12. 1876)
Next, the Society repeatedly hinted at the coming of a
Hindu “fakir” to instruct its members and just as frequently had to explain the
non-appearance of the guru.
The apparent failure of all these endeavors brought an
increasing chorus from the Society‘s enemies and eventually from its friends to
produce the proofs of its claims. (Banner of Light 46/20 “Invitation to
theosophists to enter upon the Field of Explanation and Proof,” Banner of Light
45/3: There have been many claims for occultism. From Olcott but no proof.:
“Will Theosophy Please Explain,” Religio-Philosophical Journal 24/5, April 6,
1878:4. “Alas! Poor Olcott! Where are your proofs?”)
The role assigned to Swami Dayananda was another
illustrative than of the TS‘s search for a practical teacher. Initially,
Blavatsky and Olcott assured the members that Dayananda was really adept at
taking over the swami‘s body. Including also Hurrychund Chintamon, “revealed as
a thief, and who later told C. Massey that he had never been even a chela and
had no occult powers whatsoever.
In fact, John Deveney writes on the subject of the
change (reinvention ?) of the TS that time from the emphasis on practical
application to a more philosophical (“principles”) orientation: „simple the
ultimate fallback position of schemers who had been called upon to demonstrate
what they had been advertising and, unable to do so, fell back on the
impossibility of the goals so long touted? Was the problem faced by Blavatsky
and Olcott, in other words, similar to that faced by the Strict Observance in
the 18th century when it was finally backed in a corner and had to produce its
Unknown superiors ?” (2)
1878: The Theosophical Society affiliated with the
Ārya Samāj of Swāmī Dayānanda.
1878 (June 27): The London Branch of the
Theosophical Society, known as the “British Theosophical Society of the Arya
Samaj of Aryavart,” was established. 1878–1879: Blavatsky and Olcott
departed New York harbor for India in December, with a stopover in England, and
arrived in early January
In fact, as soon they went to India, Blavatsky,
probable with the knowledge of Olcott, attempted to prepare some Masonic rite.
This is confirmed in a never before (obtained by myself at the TS archive in
Adyar) published letter from
Masonic patent salesman John Yarker to Blavatsky dated 2 Jan 1879, after Blavatsky had already moved to India, where
Yarker writes her, seeking instruction:
"I will adopt your revised Ceremonies - I wish to
advance 3 objects -1. Censorial (with the 7 imperfect ceremonies, 4 of which I
sent you), 2. Perfection (giving the gist of the Vedic doctrine), 3. For a
select few, the division of the 7 grades according to the dogma of the East. Or
would you make two branches -1? the Censorial 7 rites, and 2. the Perfection
ceremony, ranking as the first Eastern grade, Censor the second, and Sponsor
the third? By Yama (a mistake), you mean I think Capt. Archer. He was sometime
resident in Manchester, and I made his acquaintance here through Prince
Rhodocanakis.
We sent the Maharajah of Burdwan a Mandate with a
complimentary letter, but he did not reply."
That there was such an inner group seems confirmed by
Blavatsky's letter to Hurrychund Chintamon, dated 4 May 1878, we're probably
speaking of C.C. Massey she writes: "I have tried hard to make him a
Theosophist of the inner ring - an English Swamee, but failed most
signally."
W.Q. Judge is quoted in P. Deveney "Astral
Projection or Liberation of the Double and the work of the Early Theosophical
Society" p. 54 as mentioning the existence of such an inner group that
"continued secretly over the years, with Blavatsky alone having the power
to promote members in the grades." A letter by Blavatsky
published in Theosophia 1947 indicates that she also associated her
"Mahatmas" in India with masonry:
"They are members of an occult brotherhood, not
of any particular school in India ... its origin is of untold antiquity, and is
as much Masonic as present masonry is little Masonic." (Manly P. Hall,
’Madame Blavatsky - A Tribute, ”Theosophia, May-June 1947, pp. 10-11.)
Dayanand Sarasvati, who was considered a Mahatma, and
a member of the White Lodge by Blavatsky and Olcott, is supposed to have
compiled a ritual for the use of the London and New York TS. (Olcott, Old Diary
Leaves, vol. 1, pp. 468-69.)
Olcott had first encountered Moolji Thackersey,
the owner of a Bombay mill, during his 1870 passage to England when India had
surely not entered his mind. Seven years later, Blavatsky and Olcott were
visited at their New York Lamasery by the American Spiritualist, James
Peebles (1822-1922), who recognized Thackersey as a figures-mounted photograph
inside the apartment. Peebles told the delighted pair that he had encountered
Thackersey on a recent visit to Bombay and furnished Olcott with his
address. Olcott wasted no time; the following day, he wrote to his
erstwhile friend, lauding the Theosophical Society's achievements in
disseminating India's pristine wisdom. Thackersey replied almost
immediately, and the two were soon engaged in regular correspondence. For
Blavatsky, this link with India indicated nothing less than that the benevolent
regard of Providence - or, in Theosophical parlance, her Masters, oversaw their
mission.
Thackersey had become an avid disciple of the Hindu
reformist Dayananda Sarasvati. Dayananda's årya Samaj movement, with its emphatic
insistence on monotheistic anti-Brahmanical Hinduism, immediately aroused
sympathies in Blavatskian anticlericalism, which had come to the fore during
the writing of Isis Unveiled. Further, Dayananda's embracing
of the antique Vedas and modern epistemology and technology seemed to meld well
with her occultist desire to present a 'modernized' Prisca theologia. The
philosophical and theological sympathies between the societies were no doubt
further (and dishonestly) exaggerated by Hurrychund Chintamon, an årya Samaj
devotee and semi-official facilitator between the two groups, who seem to have
misrepresented Dayananda's stance on such pivotal issues as the existence of a
personal deity. Within six months, Olcott's enthusiasm for the årya
Samaj had multiplied, and his letters had become those of a suppliant:
A number of American and other students who earnestly
seek after spiritual knowledge, place themselves at your feet and pray you to
enlighten them.
Blavatsky's interest was no less evident; characteristically,
she incorporated Dayananda into her macrohistorical ensemble:
H. P. B. told me ... that he was an adept of the
Himalayan Brotherhood inhabiting the Swami's body; well known to our own
teachers, and in relations with them for the accomplishment of the work he had
in hand.
By 23 May 1878, Blavatsky and Olcott, with the support
of their Council, had agreed that the Theosophical Society should amalgamate
with the årya Samaj and would now be reconstituted as the Theosophical Society
of the årya Samaj of India. Little remained to tie Blavatsky to New
York, and she was eager to depart for India; such was not the case for Olcott,
who had serious misgivings about financing the expedition and who had the not
inconsequential problem of his wife and two sons to support.
Significantly, a flurry of letters from his then Master, Serapis, together with
Blavatsky's increased candor regarding the identity of her mysterious Indian
associate ('M:.') as being the Master Morya, appeared to tip the scales in
favor of the journey: 'definite orders from Serapis. Have to go; the
latest from 15 to 20th Dec.' They departed on the 18th.
The joy (and relief) that Blavatsky and Olcott
experienced upon arriving in Bombay on 16 February 1879 was soon tempered by
realizing that their partnership with the årya Samaj was not happy.
Hurrychund Chintamon, who had regaled them with great pomp upon their landing,
subsequently billed them for the privilege; indeed, it was soon discovered that
he had embezzled 600 rupees Blavatsky had raised for Dayananda's
movement. Energetic as ever, Blavatsky chose not to be daunted by
the deception, nor indeed by the rigors of life as a Russian emigre and
newly-nationalized American woman under the British Raj. She did not
even create her customary fuss when, during their introductory meeting,
Dayananda overlooked her in favor of Olcott. A further indication
of her emotional equilibrium is provided by the fact that only once, it seems,
did she bother overmuch with the constant police surveillance given to suspect
spies. Instead, she set about Masters-hunting, inquiring after
supramundane phenomena from various Suny sin the pair encountered in their
travels. Often she would wander away and return with flowers or a note
from a member of the Brotherhood whom she claimed to have encountered.
Marion Meade has asserted that Blavatsky sought
desperately to plunder her encounters with Indian ascetics for phenomena that
would prove the existence of the Masters. In keeping with Meade's
program, such a position is to reduce the Masters to simple instantiations of
Blavatsky's romantic temperament, mendacious disposition, and Orientalising
fervor. That noted, there are significant episodes that illustrate
Blavatsky's tendency to indulge in a little creative myth-making regarding the
Masters. Some of her tales, most notably her admittedly romanticized accounts
of the Founders' 1879 travels, written under the pseudonym 'Radda-Bai' and
entitled From the Caves and Jungles of Hindostan, do not really
compare favorably with the more prosaic version in Olcott's Old Diary
Leaves. Adepts abound in Blavatsky's account, each performing
numerous feats of wonder; Olcott's seems more concerned with 'beautifully
evoking the tropical atmosphere.' Perhaps, of more concern are the occasions
wherein Blavatsky appears likely to have cajoled or employed individuals to
impersonate Masters to beguile Olcott and others.
1) Robert Mathiesen, “The Unseen Worlds of Emma
Hardinge Britten: Some Chapters in the History of Western Occultism,”
Theosophical History, Fullerton, California
2) John P Deveney, Astral Projection or
Liberation of the Double and the Work of the Early Theosophical Society. Theosophical
History Occasional Papers Volume VI, January 1, 1997
For updates click homepage here