Introduction: The Occult Revival in America
Writing in the
up-and-coming Metaphysical Magazine, Detroit lawyer Hamilton Gay Howard informed
readers, and it had also been "taught for hundreds of years in the School
of Adepts, at Thebes, which Lord Bulwer Lytton is said to have attended for
three and a half years - half the course." "The whole course,
requiring great self-denial and continued physical trials was taken," he
believed, "by the late Madame Blavatsky, and by Colonel Olcott, of
Massachusetts, the advanced free-thinker and theosophist." Howard
especially wanted to underscore his conviction that the "wisdom of the
East" needed to be noticed, and so he excerpted a piece from a newspaper
that he identified only as the Pittsburg Dispatch. Inviting readers into a new
and for them exotic-world, its unnamed author boasted of having before him
"an English translation of a very old tantric work from the original Sanscrit, by the Hindu pandit, Rama Prasad," a work
that contained "the ancient Hindu philosophyas
regards the finer forces of nature." In its pages the author found, with
evident enthusiasm, references and explanations for "such things as the
interstellar ether; its general properties and subdivisions; the laws of
vibration; the circulation of the blood and of the nervous fluid; the nervous centres and the general anatomy of the body; the rationale
of psychometry and of occult phenomena, and a good many other things of which
modern science as yet knows little or nothing." 1
What neither Howard
nor the Dispatch writer apparently knew was that Rama Prasad's book had
originally appeared as a series of articles in the Indian-based periodical The
Theosophist, which had been launched in Bombay by none other than Helena Blavatsky and Colonel Henry Steel Olcott in 1879. Prasad himself was a decidedly Westernized Hindu and
a Theosophist, a man who moved in a discourse community that had heavily
invested in reinscribing the traditional lore of India in the scientific terms
of the modern, British-inspired West. For Prasad and those who followed him,
yogic pranayama had become the "science of breath." In the lengthy
exposition that preceded Prasad's translation of the short text from the
Sanskrit, he in fact took on the famed German scholar Max Muller for reading
the Chandogya Upanishad as in places "more or
less fanciful."
By contrast, in
Prasad's account, none of the Upanishads could be "very intelligible"
without knowing something of "the ancient Science of Breath," which
was "said to be the secret doctrine of all secret doctrines" and
"the key of all that is taught in the Upanishads." Prasad's allusion
was a double entendre. First, the Indian Theosophist had affirmed that
traditional Indian religious thought was scientific, and he had rendered the
Sanskrit title of the work he had translated as "The Science of Breath and
the Philosophy of the Tattvas." The "Tattvas" of his title
-literally "thatnesses" - were, in the
classical dualistic Samkyha philosophy of India, the
twenty-five principles constitutive of the material universe. In Prasad's
usage, however-influenced probably by Helena Blavatsky's invocation of the
"Great Breath" in her 1888, The Secret Doctrine - they referred
specifically to the "five modifications of the Great Breath." 2 Thus
Prasad's allusion to the "secret doctrine of all secret doctrines"
pointed to Blavatsky's book and, so, to Theosophy.
Both the Howard
article and the Dispatch excerpt that was part of it provide windows into a
late-nineteenth-century American world in which the imagined otherness of Asia
was redirected and rechanneled into culturally available templates for making
sense of difference. Arguably, these templates were supplied by a borderlands
discourse that arose on the fringes of liberal Protestantism as it existed in
constant commerce with a revived and reconstructed Hermeticism this available
in theosophical, New Thought, and similar versions, and often in combinations
of these. If there was anyone public event that signaled the process and its
continuing reinventions of the East, that event was the World's Parliament of
Religions of 1893, held in conjunction with the huge Columbian Exposition in
Chicago. A world's fair staged to celebrate the four-hundredth anniversary of
the European arrival in the Americas, the exposition, with its displays and
attendant events, celebrated, too, American economic and cultural "progress"
in a triumphalist spirit that masked an unexamined racism and imperialism.3 The
parliament did not and could not disentangle itself from the cultural climate
of its era, even if, with liberal Protestant leadership, its site was
physically removed from that of the larger event. In the downtown Chicago Loop
during the month of September, representatives of the world's religious
traditions came together under the sign of progress, aiming to assess the
religious status of the century and to plan for the future.
Viewed with an eye
toward American metaphysical religion, the group that assembled under the
liberal auspices of the parliament was decidedly congenial to the new
spirituality. The combinative instinct of parliament organizers and presenters
reproduced a central trope of American metaphysics. At the same time, the
canons that governed the selection process brought speakers who promised to
function in keeping with the conference's theosophizing
agenda-that is, an agenda that promoted perennialism under the rubric of
comparative religions. True enough, Roman Catholic James Cardinal Gibbons led
the assembled representatives in an Our Father prayer at the Parliament's
opening session, and Dionysios Latas,
Greek Orthodox archbishop of Zante, had come from Athens. But the unitive theme
of the parliament did not go unnoticed by some traditionalists. The General
Assembly of the Presbyterian Church refused to sanction the event, this despite
the fact that John Henry Barrows, who headed the parliament's organizing
committee, was pastor of Chicago's First Presbyterian Church. The Anglican
Archbishop of Canterbury and the Muslim sultan of Turkey also refused
endorsement. At the other end of the spectrum, among Asian representatives a
clear theosophical presence could be found. G. N. Chakravarti,
an Indian scholar there to defend Hinduism, was a convert to Theosophy. So was
the Buddhist Anagarika Dharmapala from Ceylon (present-day Sri Lanka), who had
been encouraged by Blavatsky herself to become a scholar of Buddhist
Pali-language texts. Kinza Hirai, a lay Buddhist from
Japan, similarly had been a Theosophist. Swami Vivekananda, a Neo-Vedantin from Bengal (transformed overnight by the media
and popular acclaim into a celebrity), thought along lines congenial to Theosophy.
Among non-Asians, the American Alexander Russell Webb (or Mohammed Webb), who
had converted to Islam, still told Henry Steel Olcott that he "had not
ceased to be an ardent Theosophist." Other theosophical names also could
be found among the delegates-Americans William Q. Judge and J. D. Buck and,
from England, Annie Besant and Isabel Cooper-Oakley.4
Meanwhile, the
Theosophical Society, along with Christian
Science, had been accorded a
separate "denominational congress" in conjunction with the
parliament, a recognition given only to some three dozen separate groups. Both
Theosophists and Christian Scientists were elated by attendance at their
meetings.
Theosophists glowed
their way through two special sessions held on weekends to accommodate public
interest, reporting that at the final one, with seats for four thousand,
hundreds more were standing in the aisles and along the walls. An anecdote
recounted how a Presbyterian minister and parliament manager interrupted
William Q. Judge's speech on reincarnation to tell stray Presbyterians that
their own meeting was empty and that perhaps they were confused regarding its
location and should leave immediately. Supposedly, no one followed his
advice.1n their turn, Christian Scientists filled the hall of four thousand to
hear an address by "Rev. Mary Baker G. Eddy, discoverer and founder of
Christian Science;' read to them in absentia, and to listen, too, to other
Christian Science speakers. The next day they basked in the publicity that the
Chicago Inter-Ocean provided them: "One of the best congresses yet held in
connection with the Parliament of Religions, judged by number and interest, was
that of the Christian Scientists .... For two hours before the hall opened
crowds besieged the doors eager to gain admission. At two o'clock, the time set
for opening the proceedings, the house was filled to the roof, no seats being
available for love or money."5
The parliament was
the brainchild of Charles Carroll Bonney (1831-1903), a Chicago lawyer
interested in comparative religions who was also, significantly, a
Swedenborgian. Bonney's faith in the theology of divine influx shaped his idea
and subsequent participation in parliament proceedings in which he functioned as
president. He told Christian Scientists, for example, that "no more
striking manifestation of the interposition of Divine Providence in human
affairs has come in recent years than that shown in the raising up of the body
of people known as Christian Scientists." They, indeed, were "called
to declare the real harmony between religion and science, and to restore the
waning faith of many in the verities of the sacred Scriptures."6 Nor was
Bonney alone in his ecumenism and his belief in the all-pervading presence of
Spirit. Something akin to the immanential theology of
Swedenborg and most of the metaphysicians ran through the organizing ideology
of the entire World's Parliament event.
As John Henry
Barrows, chair of the parliament, introduced his massive, two volume edition
recounting its background and transcribing its speeches, he sounded the theme
that appeared repeatedly in the messages of the various delegates. "Faith
in a Divine Power to whom men believe they owe service and worship" had
been "like the sun, a life-giving and fructifying potency in man's
intellectual and moral development." But Barrows followed up the good news
of divine immanence with the bad that delegates were aiming to correct.
"Religion, like the white light of Heaven," had been "broken
into many-colored fragments by the prisms of men." So the parliament
aimed, as one of its objects, "to change this many-colored radiance back
into the white light of heavenly truth." Its promoters, like closet
Theosophists, were "striking the noble chord of universal human
brotherhood" and evoking a "starry music which will yet drown the
miserable discords of earth." To be sure, a Christian ethos surrounded the
universal brotherhood, since it was "embodied in an Asiatic Peasant who was
the Son of God." Still, the aims of the parliament stretched the liberal
fabric of the Protestant umbrella in directions that, at least potentially,
wore thin the Christian certitude of possessing the unique-and most highly
evolved-religious truth. The parliament intended "to show to men, in the
most impressive way, what and how many important truths the various Religions
hold and teach in common."7
To that end,
organizers imported "leading scholars, representing the Brahman, Buddhist,
Confucian, Parsee, Mohammedan, Jewish and other Faiths," placed them
alongside representatives of the Christian churches, and allowed these others
time and a platform. The results, as Richard Seager argues, were not quite what
the Chicago leaders intended. Instead, non-Christian representatives upended
the liberal Christian project and exposed its tenuousness in a discourse
intended to display the wisdom and integrity of the East.8 In so doing, the
Asians flattened Christian peaks not only for themselves but also, potentially,
for Americans. And in so doing, they also underlined a way of talking,
thinking, and being in the world that promoted the project of metaphysical
religion. Now, though, metaphysics appeared under the banner of an intercepted
Asia, caught in complex thickets between separate Asian pasts, Westernized
Asian presents, and American polysemous perceptions. By this time, too,
American metaphysics had already reached a watershed in its appropriation of
global faiths to advance its homegrown spirituality. Theosophical prominence at
the World's Parliament of Religions was theologically and poetically
appropriate. It was the Asian turn of the Theosophical Society that had brought
the universalizing discourse of the 1870s and 1880s to the authoritative
statement of the 1890s. In this 1890s statement, the power of mind took on new
proportions, correspondence ruled religious perceptions, and healing energies
came from new (to non-Asian Americans) Asian wisdoms.
This chapter looks first to the Asia mediated to the West by Theosophy and then
to metaphysical American versions of yoga and Buddhism, with the presence of
Theosophy - and its partner New Thought - never far away.
Helena Blavatsky and
Henry Steel Olcott traveled to India in late 1878, and they never returned to
this country to stay. The Asian years of Theosophy and its increasingly close
ties with England, the growing rift of the founders with each other,
Blavatsky's European and English sojourn, her trials and tribulations over
fraud charges, and her death in England in 1891-these do not concern my
narrative directly. Important here, instead, are the literary products of these
years and their effects on an evolving metaphysical religion in the United
States. Isis Unveiled had played a significant role in shifting an older
spiritualist language into new and more expansive vocabularies and grammars,
and now the continuing work of the theosophical leaders received an eager
reception in America. These writings model a reading of Asia that colonized it
to suit American metaphysical requirements. In so doing, as Stephen Prothero
argues in the specific case of Olcott, they "creolized" Asian
cultural worlds with already combinative American discourses.9
Olcott's literary
creolization project was apparent as early as 1881 when he first produced his
Buddhist Catechism, a work to be considered later. Blavatsky herself provided
the more far-reaching metaphysical scripture in her monumental (nearly fifteen
hundred pages in two volumes exclusive of front matter and index) Secret
Doctrine of 1888.10 Bruce Campbell-who calls it "a, perhaps the, major
work of occultism" in the nineteenth century - has recounted its
publication history, with the new book-a reconsideration and elaboration of
Isis Unveiled announced as early as 1884. Blavatsky first planned to use The
Theosophist to issue the book, publishing it in monthly installments of the
same length. But by 1885 she left India for Europe, and so that specific
project folded. But Blavatsky reportedly wrote - prodigiously - as she traveled
and remained for a time in Italy, Switzerland, Germany, and Belgium. Her
handwritten material was transferred for her into typescript, but when he saw
it, Subba Row, the Indian Theosophist who had
promised to edit it, withdrew before what he regarded an impossible task.
Eventually, after Blavatsky moved to London in 1887, Archibald and Bertram Keightley - the two Theosophists most responsible for her
presence there - created an outline for a manuscript that by then purportedly
stood over a yard high. Of the four volumes that the Keightleys
suggested, only two were eventually published as The Secret Doctrine-a first
subtitled Cosmogenesis and dealing with the evolution of the cosmos, and a
second called Anthropogenesis and addressing the theme of human evolution. Two
others, Ed Fawcett and Richard Harte, supplied help for aspects of the
project.10
As in the case of
Isis Unveiled , William Emmette Coleman charged Blavatsky with plagiarism - a
charge that was old news, given her previous publishing history. She claimed
that her volumes-and "the Secret Doctrine of the Archaic ages" - were
built around stanzas from the "Book of Dzyan;' a
work that Blavatsky introduced as a fragment from a Tibetan Buddhist text
called the Mani Koumboum, the sacred writing of the
Dzungarians, in the northern part of the country. While she was in Tibet, she
explained, she was allowed to memorize the stanzas. But the text was "not
in the possession of European Libraries" and was "utterly unknown to
our Philologists, or at any rate was never heard of by them under its present
name." On these points, Coleman and Blavatsky agreed, and he added that
the language of Senzar, the professed original
language of the work, was completely unknown. As in the case of her first huge
work, he accused her of unacknowledged reliance on nineteenth-century sources
from which she had compiled her work. Chief among them were H. H. Wilson's
Vishnu Purdna (1840),Alexander Winchell's World-Life;
or, Comparative Geology (1883), and John Dowson's Hindu Classical Dictionary
(1879)' Nor was he alone in speculating on her big book's composition. Rene
Guenon believed it was based on Tibetan fragments, but different from the ones
Blavatsky herself claimed. Jewish mystical scholar Gershom Scholem
thought its origins lay in the Jewish Kabbalah. And according to Alvin Boyd
Kuhn, Max Muller sardonically observed that Blavatsky was either a
"remarkable forger" or the contributor of "the most valuable
gift to archaeological research in the Orient."12
Yet, granted evidence
for the charge of plagiarism, Blavatsky's facility in joining the South Asian
discourse to a series of other cultural conversations-Hermetic, Western
scientific, and even Christian-marks her work with a synthetic originality that
needs to be noticedY Indeed, gun-shy perhaps from her
experience with Isis Unveiled, she herself indirectly acknowledged the extent
of her dependence (and also her estimate of what she had done) in her
upper-case quotation from the French essayist Michel de Montaigne in her
introduction: "'I HAVE HERE MADE ONLY A NOSEGAY OF CULLED FLOWERS, AND
HAVE BROUGHT NOTHING OF MY OWN BUT THE STRING THAT TIES THEM.''' "Pull the
'string' to pieces and cut it up in shreds, if you will," she added.
"As for the nosegay of FACTS-YOU will never be able to make away with
these."14 Still further, for all the scholarly dismissal, Blavatsky's work
would shape language not only in theosophical circles but also -as Campbell's
assessment of it has already suggested well beyond them. Its statement of the
"secret doctrine" of Asia would provide the vocabulary and grammar
for a generic metaphysical discourse. In it Asian
historical particularity was effaced, and the universalizing potential of
concepts like reincarnation, karma, and subtle bodies was amplified many times
over. Arguably, the general American metaphysical project of the late twentieth
and twenty-first centuries would continue to sound themes and enact Asias that originated in the Blavatsky opus.
Beyond that, in the
elaborate sacred tale of origins that The Secret Doctrine constructed,
Blavatsky provided a story of cosmic and human origins that, whatever it told
about Asia, surely imitated the West. In its overall modeling, her narrative
resembled ancient Gnostic mythic material or Kabbalistic lore from the Middle
Ages. Like Gnostic and Kabbalistic mythologies, Blavatsky's ambitious theodicy
explained the predicament of humans by elaborating a series of events and
entities that, in effect, harmfully separated things human from their divine or
originating source. As in older Gnostic and Kabbalistic forays, the Blavatskian version of the order of the universe
complicated human origins - as if interlarding an explanation with numerous
layers could prove the intrinsic sacrality of humans and account for evil
without alleging a flaw in the source of all. Hermes Trismegistus stayed
present in this account. Blavatsky thought the "Divine Pymander"
and the "hermetic Fragments" to be echoes of the "Esoteric
philosophy and the Hindu Puranas," an order historians might well want to
reverse and a connection they might want to challenge on other grounds.15 In
the context of the late nineteenth century's preoccupation with Darwinian
evolution (and Blavatsky's own engagement with it), The Secret Doctrine-worlds
away from what by the early twentieth century would become Protestant
fundamentalism - posited a human devolution from the divine that represented
also an evolution.
"Kosmos" existed in eternity "before the
re-awakening of still slumbering Energy," which became "the emanation
of the Word in later systems." The cosmic system was characterized by a
perpetual periodicity, a latency and activity by turns. Always, there had been
the "ONE LIFE, eternal, invisible, yet Omnipresent, without beginning or
end, yet periodical in its regular manifestations, between which periods reigns
the dark mystery of non-Being; unconscious, yet absolute Consciousness; unrealisable, yet the one self-existing reality; truly, 'a
chaos to the sense, a Kosmos to the reason.' Its one absolute attribute, which is ITSELF, eternal,
ceaseless Motion, is called in esoteric parlance the 'Great Breath: which is
the perpetual motion of the universe, in the sense of limitless, ever-present
SPACE. That which is motionless cannot be Divine." 16
If the divine was
motion and energy, the divine was also Mind or Thought, the "Word"
from which all things emanated and in which lay concealed the "plan of
every future Cosmogony and Theogony." Moreover, in the Blavatskian
synthesis-as throughout American metaphysical religion-the third abiding
feature became the correspondence that ran through the layers of reality, so
that spiritual anthropology replicated the eternal patterning of the universe.
God was, in one way, neither close nor intimate; in another, the divine was
alive and resonant in every cell. The "Great Breath" kept on
breathing, and what it breathed was people. If this sounds like an overture in
the direction of the contemplative mind, Blavatsky's own etymology suggests the
same. She thought that "Dzyan" (also
spelled "Dzyn" or "Dzen")
was a corrupt form of Sanskrit Dhyana, which means meditation. Beyond that,
with all the preoccupation with science (both Books I and II include a Part III
titled "Science and the Secret Doctrine Contrasted") that Blavatsky
displayed, she was demonstrably as concerned about aesthetics. The secret
wisdom of Dzyan came packaged in "stanzas."
She titled the prelude to her first volume "Proem." And her
preoccupations with correspondence took the form, often, of attention to
numerical symmetries akin to those in mathematics or music. Alluding to her
doctrine of seven human races and also to the dangerous power hidden within the
symmetries, she told readers that "doctrines such as the planetary chain,
or the seven races, at once give a clue to the seven-fold nature of man."
"Each principle," she continued, was "correlated to a plane, a
planet, and a race; and the human principles are, on every plane, correlated to
seven-fold occult forces-those of the higher planes being of tremendous
power." 17
Blavatsky's statement
of a mind-energy-correspondence triad is instructive. Carl Jackson identifies
it with "traditional Hindu philosophy" and suggests that concepts of
"Brahman, maya, atman, and karma" had been "reformulated in Theosophical
terminology," with connections especially to Vedanta. But if this was the
case, it is also true that Blavatsky announced the message in ways that
intended or not-were congenial to American metaphysicians schooled in the
moralism and work ethic of their culture's Protestant moorings. A confirmed perennialist, Blavatsky proclaimed her "Secret Doctrine"
as "the universally diffused religion of the ancient and prehistoric
world," and she quickly elaborated its propositions. First came the
"metaphysical ONE ABSOLUTE - BE-NESS;' the "rootless root" that
could only be known by negation, "beyond all thought or speculation"
and symbolized both as "absolute abstract Space" and "absolute
Abstract Motion."
Second came an affirmation
of the eternity of the universe as a "boundless plane," a
"playground" for countless appearing and disappearing universes, so
that the "law of periodicity, of flux and reflux, ebb and flow" ruled
absolutely. Third-and the existential concern that drove the first two-came the
"fundamental identity of all Souls with the Universal Over-Soul,"
which was "an aspect of the Unknown Root." There was, therefore,
an" obligatory pilgrimage for every Soul- a spark of the former - through
the Cycle of Incarnation (or 'Necessity') in accordance with Cyclic and Karmic
law." Blavatsky's world emerged as a hard-work universe in which there
were "no privileges or special gifts in man" except for "those
won by his own Ego through personal effort and merit throughout a long series
of metempsychoses and reincarnations." 18 This
multiplication of incarnations (beyond the Asian sources)-the cycle of
seemingly endless returns for still more growth (for the soul on a
"spiritual" path)-became a hallmark of later theosophical discourse
into the twenty-first century. Souls on earth went to school and learned
metaphysical lessons as they journeyed.
Blavatsky's
"slanderers" would generate "bad Karma," but for those on
the path the aesthetics of contemplation opened out into vast expanses. Here
space, "THE ETERNAL PARENT WRAPPED IN HER EVER INVISIBLE ROBES HAD SLUM-
BERED ONCE AGAIN FOR SEVEN ETERNITIES." Eventually, though, the spatial
"MOTHER" swelled and expanded "LIKE THE BUD OF THE LOTUS."
Her vibration touched the light in the midst of darkness; a single ray entered
the "MOTHERDEEP"; and the egg therein became the
"WORLD-EGG." SO it went, as already the number seven began to be
manifested both inside and outside the egg. The "GREAT MOTHER; ''Who was
at least once called the "FATHER-MOTHER," was the eternal cosmic
source from which the divine, the spiritual, and all of the
"MINDBORN" emanated. We need not follow Blavatsky's narrative further
to glimpse behind its overproduction what Alvin Kuhn'called
"a recital of the scheme according to which the primal unity of unmanifest
Being breaks up into differentiation and multiformity and so fills space with
conscious evolving beings."19
It is, however, worth
marking the points in the narrative that reinforce the Hermeticism of the past
and reconstitute it as a new statement for the times a statement that, for
Americans, domesticated Asia as a function of vernacularized Western mystical
categories. Indian sacred lore in the Vishnu Purana told of a vast egg that
floated on cosmic waters. Vishnu entered the egg as the creator Brahma-to
produce the three worlds of earth, atmosphere, and heaven; he, in turn,
preserved them through countless ages and finally destroyed them with flames as
Rudra. Then rain fell to form one vast ocean, and, like a coiled snake, Vishnu
slept on the waters. The time from Brahma's initial act of creation to the time
of destruction was called a day of Brahma, or a Kalpa.
Within each Kalpa, a thousand cycles passed. These
were known as Maha Yugas (literally, "great
years"), with each extending for 4,320,000 human years or 12,000 years of
the gods (a year of the gods being 360 human years, and a day of the gods being
a single human year). Every Maha Yuga was in turn
subdivided into four lesser Yugas, with each shorter than the previous one.
During these increasingly shorter Yugas observance of law declined and
humankind grew ever more corrupt, with the shortest and most devolved of them
being the Kali Yuga of 1,800 years. After the thousand Maha
Yugas, Vishnu's sleep upon the ocean lasted as long. Finally, at the end of
this protracted night, Vishnu woke up and re-created the worlds as Brahma; and
so a distinct day of Brahma began anew. But that was not all. Brahma had a life
span, and thus there were 100 years of 360 days and nights of Brahma
respectively, whereupon the original evolution of life and worlds reversed
itself and Vishnu returned to the contemplation of his Supreme Self, alone with
eternal Time (Kala), Spirit (Purusha), and Primary Matter (Prakriti). When Vishnu
decided that he wanted to play once more, the vast drama of creation again
unfolded.20
In the midst of this
cosmic theater of epic proportions, the Vishnu Purana warned that humans were
living in the Kali Yuga, the most devolved state of its current Maha Yuga. Blavatsky, at least manifestly, followed its
narrative. The Kali Yuga that the West had reached was "an age BLACK WITH
HORRORS." "Man" was "his own destroyer" in a Kali Yuga
that reigned "supreme" not only in India but also there. Yet more
than the Vishnu Purana, Blavatsky historicized freely and pointedly. She
predicted that "about nine years" from the time she was writing,
"the first cycle of the first- millenniums, that began with the great
cycle of the Kali-Yuga" would end. More apocalyptically, she declared that
humans stood "at the very close of the cycle of 5,000 years of the present
Aryan Kaliyuga; and between this time and 1897" there would be "a
large rent made in the Veil of Nature," with "materialistic science"
receiving a "death-blow." Still further, in Blavatsky's opus the
language of the Yugas receded, and, in fact, at least one extended reference to
the Kali Yuga read it decidedly more positively. At the Kali Yuga's close,
Blavatsky announced, quoting one source at length, the minds of the living
would be awakened, becoming clear as crystal. They would give birth to a new
race who would be truly human beings, following the laws of the age of purity.
Blavatsky thought that the "blessings" of the Kali Yuga were
"well described" and that they "fit in admirably even with that
which one sees and hears in Europe and other civilized and Christian lands in
full XIXth, and at the dawn of the XXth century of our great era of ENLIGHTENMENT." As
important here, working between what she claimed were esoteric Buddhist and
Vedantic (Raja Yoga) sources as interpreted already in theosophical writings,
she regarded the Kalpas as "Rounds."
Indeed, what preoccupied her-more than Kalpas and
Yugas-were "Rounds," with each "Round" in the human saga
"composed of the Yugas of the seven periods of Humanity."21
Since all things
traveled in sevens in Blavatsky's universe, every star or planet was linked to
six "companion globes." Life proceeded on the seven globes in seven
rounds or cycles, with rest periods or times of "obscuration"
between, and in a complex rebirthing process each globe had to "transfer
its life and energy to another planet." Into this cosmic scenario of
action and rest, Blavatsky inserted the earth, and in so doing she historicized
her narrative in ways that hinted more of Western occultism than Eastern
puranas. The earth, as the "visible representative of its invisible
superior fellow globes," was required to live through seven rounds. For
the first three, it formed and consolidated; for the fourth, it settled and
hardened; and in the final three, it returned "to its first ethereal form
... spiritualised, so to say." Significantly, in
the fourth round humanity carne to be, and in the later rounds the human race
would be "ever tending to reassume its primeval form."
"Man" would become "a God and then-GOD, like every other atom in
the Universe." 22
Here, in the fourth
round, a series of "root-races" had sprung up in succession, each of
them dwelling on a particular continent. As Blavatsky plotted their history, in
what Bruce Campbell has called a "process of involution and
evolution," she invoked "Ethereal" beginnings and a
"spiritual" end. The earliest (prehistoric) root-race, the
"Self-born," arose on a continent called "The Imperishable
Sacred Land." Thereafter came a second race on the "Hyperborean"
continent, a third on Lemuria (see Case Study), and a fourth on Atlantis. After that, the fifth
root-race, the Aryan, appeared, and it was this race that flourished in most of
recorded history, including Blavatsky's nineteenth century. She had first
identified its continent as "America" but went on to explain
that, as it was "situated at the Antipodes," it was "Europe and
Asia Minor, almost coeval with it" and then simply Europe as the
"fifth great Continent."23
From whence had
Blavatsky synthesized this material that took shape as a dissident history of
the human species? If a reconstructed (which to a degree she acknowledged)
metaphysical Asia supplied a part and Western Hermeticism contributed another
part, a third came from a mix of novelistic sources with popular science
accounts of the period. Plato, of course, had been the ancient literary source
for Atlantean speculation in his Timaeus and his unfinished Critias.
But by Blavatsky's time Jules Verne's Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea
(with an English translation in 1873) and Edward Bulwer-Lytton's The Coming
Race (with, in its publication year, 1871, five editions) brought Atlantean
themes and the notion of hidden, forgotten human history-to the fore. By 1882,
however, these science fiction sources were eclipsed by Ignatius Donnelly's
Atlantis:
The Antediluvian World,
the work of a former Republican lieutenant governor of Minnesota, United States
congressman, and continuing civil servant and politician. With seven editions
in the year of its publication and accolades from William Gladstone, prime
minister of England, the work was translated into Swedish the year after it
appeared and by 1890 had been printed in twenty-three American and twenty-six
English editions. Donnelly had immersed himself in the latest findings of his
era's science and had summarized the material. Here Plato's description of the
island-continent of Atlantis could be read historically, with the natural
catastrophe that destroyed it obliterating a spectacular human civilization.
Still more, some of the Atlanteans had managed to escape and survive. England's
civilization was Atlantean in its origins and that of the United States thus
derivatively so.24
Blavatsky's third
root-race of Lemurians looked even more credible in terms of the science of the
time. The Pacific "land of lemurs" had first been proposed by Philip Lutley Sclater, former secretary
of the London Zoological Society, fellow of the Royal Society, and friend of
Thomas Huxley and Charles Darwin. Interested in ornithology and the fauna of
Central and South America, he theorized species distribution in evolutionary
terms, invoking a land bridge that began in Madagascar, moved through southern
India, and ended in the Malay Peninsula, and calling it Lemuria. Later, the
well-known German evolutionary biologist Ernst Heinrich Haeckel argued for Sclater's Lemuria as the original home of humankind, even
if he later changed his mind. Like Atlantis, Lemuria had sunk into the sea,
well below the surface of the Indian Ocean. Its former existence, however,
helped Haeckel in explaining the way that migration assisted the geographical
distribution of humans.25
Blavatsky absorbed it
all-Vishnu, Hermes, popularized science, and even the Christian narrative of
the original sin and fall of humanity-in the comprehensive unity of her
account. The Atlantteans of her telling had fallen
into sin and begotten monsters. In the racialism characteristic of her time,
she reported that they had started out being brown-colored but later became
"black with sin," degenerating into "magical practices and gross
animality." They were "the first 'Sacrificers'
to the gods of matter," and their worship devolved into
"self-worship" and "phallicism." "Marked with a
character of SORCERY," they had lost the ability to use their "third
eye." Still, the shadow of Atlantean evil was swept away for Blavatsky in
the ebb and flow of the law of periodicity. The Atlanteans, in effect, had died
because their time had come, not - she stated specifically - because of their
depravity or because they had become "black with sin." And in yet
another apparent contradiction, their development as "giants whose
physical beauty and strength reached their climax" followed evolutionary
law.26
Read another-Asian
and Hermetic-way, however, the fall that began human history meant the
"descent" onto earth of the gods who became incarnate in human
beings. Every avatar (or, Blavatsky said, "incarnation") meant
"the fall of a God into generation;' and she went on to cite the
Upanishads for support. There was a loss of purity here, a compromise with
perfection rather than a moral decision by a weak and disobedient human pair.
But the "Fall of Spirit into generation" was necessary for
self-consciousness, for Atman by itself would pass into '''NON-BEING, which is
absolute Being.''' At the same time, the universe of humans was an illusory
affair; it was Maya, with everything "temporary therein." Evil came
with thought, which introduced a principle of finitude and separation, and it
was related, too, to karmic law in which over countless eons of time humans
worked out their destiny. Blavatsky orchestrated a complex choreography between
this destiny and human freedom, rejecting notions of fatalism and invoking free
agency for humans in their earthly sojourn. No individual could escape what she
called a "ruling Destiny;' but always a choice of paths to it existed.
Karma neither created nor designed. Rather, each human planned and created
"causes," and the law of karma adjusted "the effects."
"Those who believe in Karma have to believe in destiny," she
declared, "which, from birth to death, every man is weaving thread by
thread around himself, as a spider does his cobweb." 27
According to The
Secret Doctrine's report, Atlanteans and Lemurians had done so, and likewise
members of the Aryan race were presently so engaged. Given all of this-and the
exotic call of lost worlds and ancient, unknown peoples-the metaphysical
afterlife of Blavatsky's Atlantis and Lemuria proved as extensive as her reinscription of the law of karma and reincarnation.
Meanwhile, Asia bockoned again in her doctrine of the
subtle bodies. Newly impressed (since Isis Unveiled) with the all-encompassing
"sevenfold principle;' which she found everywhere in nature, she
discovered the seven once more. Whereas previously in Isis she had found nature
and humanity to be triune-each human had a physical, astral, and spiritual body
(or body, soul, and spirit) - now a grand multiplication of subtle bodies took
place. Just as the visible planets and their rulers (the planetary gods)
numbered the fabled seven, "principles in Man" corresponded. Seven
bodies existed on "three material planes and one spiritual plane;' and
they boasted Asian-sounding names that had already been divulged to A. P. Sinnett in Esoteric Buddhism (by the Mahatmas, he claimed).
The highest body was the "atma" (Hindu
Atman, or "Universal Spirit"); the lowest, the "gross
Matter" of the physical body. On an ascending scale in between came the
"life" body, or the "Prana" (literally, "breath"
as the "active power producing all vital phenomena"); the astral
body, or Linga-Sarira (an "inert vehicle or form
on which the body [was] moulded"); the animal
soul, or "Kama-rupa" (the "principle
of animal desire"); the "Manas" (Mind, or human soul); and the
"Buddhi" (spiritual soul). In this ambitious and overarching schema,
Blavatsky had provided a tour de force on the "Septenary Element in the
Vedas," but she was also backtracking toward the West. She told readers
that, in the ancient world, "socalled Christian
Gnostics had adopted this time-honoured system"
and that she had found Kabbalistic borrowings, too.28
See Case Study: The T.S. Inner Group
Not all the parts of
the septenary human were fully developed, however, and this, too, supported
Blavatsky's earlier threefold designation. As Kuhn summarized, for her humans
were "sevenfold potentially, threefold actually," and this meant that
of the "seven principles only the lower three have been brought from
latency to activity." Blavatsky employed the term Monad to describe the Atma Buddhi, the last two-and highest-
"principles" within the septenary human, and she called the Monad the
"dual soul." She also called the human Monad, in its "informing
principle," the "HIGHER SELF;' and saw it as "one and the
same" with an "animal Monad," even if the first was
"endowed with divine intelligence" and the second "with
instinctual faculty alone." Human Monads participated in a far vaster
monadic universe, since individual Monads were "spontaneously selfactive" units characteristic of nature. In an echo
of the mid-nineteenth-century spiritualist cosmology, all "Matter"
was "Spirit, and vice versa"; and "the Uni sophical
Society in America. Beginning after Blavatsky's death in 1891, Judge claimed
esoteric privileges and declared his personal contact with the Masters or
Mahatmas of theosophical lore (see the previous chapter). In a bitter feud
between the two men continents apart (Olcott, the president of the Theosophical
Society, was in India), judicial proceedings were launched against Judge, who
was vice president. Accused of deception on a series of matters, of falsely
claiming communication with Masters, and of also falsely sending personal
messages and orders as if authorized by Masters, Judge faced a council and
committee of the Theosophical Society hat first found grounds not to act
against him. However, when evidence contained in the private papers of the
Englishwoman Annie Besant-who would later head the society-was made public
without her consent, matters came to a head. A convention of the society in
1894 resolved, after Olcott's urging, that Judge should resign as vice
president and go through a reelection process. The American section responded
quickly. Meeting in a Boston convention the following year, members voted to
secede, declaring their autonomy and changing the name of the American section
to "The Theosophical Society in America." Then they elected Judge
president for life-a role he held only for a year until his death in 1896. In
his turn, Olcott expelled Judge from the parent Theosophical Society. No winner
took all. Most of the American lodges followed Judge, but later-with lecturing
and organizing efforts on the part of Besant and Countess Constance Wachtmeister, the widow of a former Swedish ambassador to London
- some of the American work of the parent body was recouped.34
For both branches of
the society in the United States, American readings of Asia continued to mold
it to metaphysical categories already abroad in the nation. Here could be found
roots both in the Hermetic tradition of the West and in the polyglot and
combinative culture of the land, in which Native American and African American
memory and practice functioned as the repressed knowledge of white Americans.
And here, too, could be found a spirituality that, however much and however
vociferously it protested, was engrafted on the Anglo-Protestant base that had
shaped public culture. We need not subscribe to an essentialism that posits a
one true reading of Asia to notice that Americans were creating an Asia to
their own visionary requirements, an Asia of their dreams that would facilitate
the shaping of their waking selves and Selves.
Metaphysical
Self-fashioning, strongly influenced by theosophical representations of Asia,
grew apace as the nineteenth century wound down and the new "world
soul" entering "into the elements, such as air, fire, water, and then
into the mineral, vegetable, animal, and human worlds." Each "soul
spark," they would learn, went "through all things thus" and
slowly reached "perfection," with "soul-union with the all"
as the "only real state." Meanwhile, they were assured that the
"Life Principle" that flowed through all could be called "the
living Breath of the unknown Eternal One" and that its "great
Law" was "Karma." Matter, or "Substance;' said the
catechism, was that into which the "Great Breath" breathed, and they
could identify it as the "World Mother or the Oversoul." When they
asked what next, the stock children's answers explained that "after a long
period, The Great Breath" was "drawn in again" and that then the
world "all dissolved back again into The Breath." The
"Breath," however, moved "to and fro;'
and young readers were brought back to the law of Karma, with its "strict
justice" as "the eternal nature of all being" and
"Universal Brotherhood" as the moral of the tale. Where could
"an example of this in human life" be found? The answer came swift
and sure. "If I speak an angry word to anyone at the beginning of the day,
it makes both him and me feel differently for some time. This affects what we
say to others, changes them to us, and so all are injured by the one selfish
deed."32
The practical
simplicity of the teaching was inescapable, suited more to the urbanized
American Northeast with its Anglo-Protestant culture of moralism than a
putative South Asian ashram. The progress of the soul-spark through the forms -
the return of the Monad to the One - not only performed itself as agency but,
ever and especially, as moral agency. Several readings away from Blavatsky's
Hindu and Hermetic sources, Judge's Theosophy functioned as a distinct species
of American metaphysical religion. Meanwhile, the American lodges flourished.
The same year that the children of would-be adepts were learning their
theosophical catechism, The Path was reporting some thirty-four American
branches of the Theosophical Society, with lodges not only in obvious places
like New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Boston but also in
medium-sized cities such as Cincinnati, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, and St.
Louis and smaller ones like Grand Island (Nebraska), Bridgeport (Connecticut),
Decorah (Iowa), Santa Cruz (California), and Muskegon (Michigan). A year later,
the magazine counted fifty-four lodges in North America, including one in
Toronto, Canada, a sizable number of the 258 lodges worldwide. By the next year
(1892), there were sixty North American lodges, including the single Canadian
lodge. The pattern was similar for the next two years. There were seventy-seven
North American lodges in 1893 and eighty-four the following year, including
three in Canada for both years.33
By this time, Judge
was heavily embroiled in the conflict with Henry Steel Olcott that would lead
to rupture and independence for what became the Theo sophical
Society in America. Beginning after Blavatsky's death in 1891, Judge claimed
esoteric privileges and declared his personal contact with the Masters or
Mahatmas of theosophical lore. In a bitter feud between the two men continents
apart (Olcott, the president of the Theosophical Society, was in India),
judicial proceedings were launched against Judge, who was-vice president.
Accused of deception on a series of matters, of falsely claiming communication
with Masters, and of also falsely sending personal messages and orders as if
authorized by Masters, Judge faced a council and committee of the Theosophical
Society that first found grounds not to act against him. However, when evidence
contained in the private papers of the Englishwoman Annie Besant - who would
later head the society - was made public without her consent, matters came to a
head. A convention of the society in 1894 resolved, after Olcott's urging, that
Judge should resign as vice president and go through a reelection process. The
American section responded quickly. Meeting in a Boston convention the
following year, members voted to secede, declaring their autonomy and changing
the name of the American section to "The Theosophical Society in
America." Then they elected Judge president for life-a role he held only
for a year until his death in 1896. In his turn, Olcott expelled Judge from the
parent Theosophical Society. No winner took all. Most of the American lodges
followed Judge, but later - with lecturing and organizing efforts on the part
of Besant and Countess Constance Wachtmeister, the
widow of a former Swedish ambassador to London - some of the American work of
the parent body was recouped.34
For both branches of
the society in the United States, American readings of Asia continued to mold it
to metaphysical categories already abroad in the nation. Here could be found
roots both in the Hermetic tradition of the West and in the polyglot and
combinative culture of the land, in which Native American and African American
memory and practice functioned as the repressed knowledge of white Americans.
And here, too, could be found a spirituality that, however much and however
vociferously it protested, was engrafted on the Anglo-Protestant base that had
shaped public culture. We need not subscribe to an essentialism that posits a
one true reading of Asia to notice that Americans were creating an Asia to
their own visionary requirements, an Asia of their dreams that would facilitate
the shaping of their waking selves and Selves.
1. Hamilton Gay
Howard, "Psychic Law of Attraction and Repulsion," in
"Department of Psychic Experiences;' Metaphysical Magazine 3, no. 5 (May
1896): 396-4°4,4°2 (emphasis in Metaphysical Magazine). The work to which the
Pittsburg Dispatch writer was alluding was Rama Prasad, The Science of Breath
and the Philosophy of the Tatwas: (Translated from
the Sanskrit) with Fifteen Introductory and Explanatory Essays on Nature's
Finer Forces (Eight Re-printed from "The Theosophist," with
Modifications, and Seven New (London: Theosophical Publishing, 1890), which
appeared in a second and revised version in London in 1894 as Nature's Finer
Forces: The Science of Breath and the Philosophy of the Tattvas, edited by G[ eorge]. R[ obert]. S[ tow].
Mead. It is not clear from the context which edition was being cited in the
newspaper nor whether the paper was published in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
represented in a variant spelling, or a town with a similar name (such as
Pittsburg, California, which is northeast of Oakland).
2. Bruce
F. Campbell, Ancient Wisdom Revived: A History of the Theosophical Movement
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980),79; Rama Prasad, The Science
of Breath and thi!"f'hilosophy
of the Tattvas, 2d ed., ed. G[eorge]. R[obert]. S[tow]. Mead (1894), reprinted as Nature's Finer
Forces: The Science of Breath and Philosophy of the Tattvas (Whitefish, Mont.:
Kessinger, [1997]), 179, 1 (emphasis for "science" in the title is
mine); H. P. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine: The Synthesis of Science,
Religion, and Philosophy, 2 vols. (London: Theosophical Publishing, 1888). On
Samkhya philosophy, see Edeltraud Harzer,
"Samkhya," in Mircea Eliade, ed., The Encyclopedia of Religion (New
York: Macmillan, 1987), 13: 47-51. I am indebted to my colleague Barbara
Holdrege for pointing me toward Samkhya and toward dualism here and elsewhere.
3. See
Robert W. Rydell, All the World's a Fair: Visions of Empire at American
International Exhibitions, 1876-1916 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1984); and, with particular application to religion, Richard Hughes Seager, The
World's Parliament of Religions (Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1995);
John P. Burris, Exhibiting Religion: Colonialism and Spectacle at International
Expositions, 1851-1893 (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 2001),
esp. 86-166.
4. See
Carl T. Jackson, The Oriental Religions and American Thought: NineteenthCentury Explorations (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood,
1981),244-45, 251-52; Sylvia Cranston, H.P.B.: The Extraordinary Life and
Influence of Helena Blavatsky, Founder of the Modem Theosophical Movement (New
York: Putnam's, 1994),426.
5.
Cranston, H.P.B., 426-27; Campbell, Ancient Wisdom Revived, 102-3; John Henry
Barrows, ed., The World's Parliament of Religions: An Illustrated and Popular
Story of the World's First Parliament of Religions, Held in Chicago in
Connection with the Columbian Exposition of1893, 2 vols. (Chicago: Parliament
Publishing, 1893), 2: 1419; Chicago Inter-Ocean, 21 September 1893, as quoted
in Robert Peel, Mary Baker Eddy: The Years of Authority (New York: Holt,
Rinehart, and Winston, 1977), 49.
6.
Jackson, Oriental Religions and American Thought, 244; Eric J. Ziolkowski, ed., A Museum of Faiths: Histories and Legacies
of the 1893 World's Parliament of Religions (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993), 7;
Seager, World's Parliament of Religions, 51-52; Barrows, ed., World's
Parliament of Religions, 2: 1419.
7. Barrows, ed., World's Parliament of
Religions, 1: 3, viii-ix, 18.
8.
Ibid., 1: 18; see Seager, World's Parliament of Religions, esp. 103-20.
9.
See Stephen Prothero, The White Buddhist: The Asian Odyssey of Henry Steel
Olcott (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1996), esp. 5-10, 176-82.
10. Henry Steel
Olcott, A Buddhist Catechism, According to the Canon of the Southern Church
(Colombo, Ceylon: Theosophical Society, Buddhist Section, 1881); Blavatsky,
Secret Doctrine, see n2 above.
11. Campbell, Ancient
Wisdom Revived, 48 (emphasis in original), 40-41.
12. Ibid., 41-42;
Alvin Boyd Kuhn, Theosophy: A Modern Revival of Ancient Wisdom (New York: Henry
Holt, 1930), 195; H. P. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine: The Synthesis of
Science, Religion, and Philosophy, 2 vols. (1888; rpt., Los Angeles: Theosophy
Company, 1974), 1: xxii (all subsequent references are to this edition).
Blavatsky's nineteenth-century sources were available in their earliest
editions as H[orace]. H[ayman].
Wilson, The Vishnu Purana: A System of Hindu Mythology and Tradition (London,
1840); Alexander Winchell, World-Life; or, Comparative Geology (Chicago: S. C.
Griggs, 1883); John "bowson, A Classical
Dictionary of Hindu Mythology and Religion, Geography, History, and Literature
(London: Triibner, 1879).
13. It is
beyond my scope here to evaluate ColCJ;pan's
evidence. However, on a much smaller matter - Coleman's charge in a short essay
that Blavatsky "largely" plagiarized from Ignatius Donnelly's
Atlantis: The Antediluvian World (New York: Harper, 1882) and that she
"coolly appropriated" a significant series of "detailed
evidences" on the relationships between Eastern and Atlantean
civilizations without giving Donnelly credit-my own comparison of Donnelly and
Blavatsky suggests something different. Reading Donnelly's part 3, chapter 4,
against Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine has revealed a comprehensive reliance not
merely on this Donnelly chapter but on the whole of his book. Nor was I able to
locate clear verbal dependence in a three-page series of items to which Coleman
pointed, even as Blavatsky's series was different from Donnelly's. Moreover,
Blavatsky quoted Donnelly once and cited him twice more. What she did not do
was to credit Donnelly as her source when she cited another author purely from
a quotation in Donnelly. See William Emmette Coleman, "The Sources of
Madame Blavatsky's Writings," Appendix C, in Vsevolod
Servyeevich Solovyoff, A
Modem Priestess of Isis, trans. Walter Leaf (London: Longmans Green, 1895),
358. For a more extensive discussion, see Catherine L. Albanese,
"Dissident History: American Religious Culture and the Emergence of the
Metaphysical Tradition;' in Walter H. Conser Jr. and
Sumner B. Twiss, eds., Religious Diversity and American Religious History:
Studies in Traditions and Cultures (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1997),
186 n72.
14. Blavatsky,
Secret Doctrine, 1: xlvi (upper case in original).
15. Ibid., 1:
285.
16. Ibid., 1:
1-2 (upper case in original).
17. Ibid., 1:
1, xxxv; Kuhn, Theosophy, 194.
18. Jackson, Oriental
Religions and American Thought, 167 (emphases in original); Blavatsky, Secret
Doctrine, 1: 14 (upper case in original), 16-19.
19. Blavatsky,
Secret Doctrine, 1: xxxvi, 27-29, 33 (upper case in original); Kuhn, Theosophy,
201.
20. For a brief
and useful summary, see Thomas J. Hopkins, The Hindu Religious Tradition
(Encino, Calif.: Dickenson, 1971), 100-101.
21. Blavatsky,
Secret Doctrine, 1: 645 (upper case in original), 644, 377, xliv, 612, 378
(emphasis and upper case in original), xliii. Blavatsky's source, she claimed,
was Yamadeva Modelyar.
22. Blavatsky,
Secret Doctrine 1: 158-59 (emphasis and upper case in original).
23. Ibid., 1:
160, 2: 6, 164, 7-8; Campbell, Ancient Wisdom Revived, 44.
24. Jules
Verne, Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea; or, The Marvellous
and Exciting Adventures of Pierre Aronnax, Conseil
His Servant, and Ned Land, a Canadian Harpooner (Boston: G. M. Smith, 1873);
Edward Bulwer-Lytton, The Coming Race (Edinburgh and London: W. Blackwood,
1871) (the work was also published in New York and Toronto the same year);
Donnelly, Atlantis (see m3 above); Albanese, "Dissident History;' 172-75.
For Donnelly's political career, see Martin Ridge, Ignatius Donnelly: The ~rtrait of a Politician (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1962); and David D. Anderson, Ignatius Donnelly (Boston: Twayne, 1980).
25. On Sclater, see C. Brown.Qoode, ed.,
The Published Writings of Philip Lutley Sclater, 1844-1896, Smithsonian Institution, Bulletin of
the United States National Museum, No. 49 (Washington, D.C.: Government
Printing Office, 1896), xvi-xix; Ernst Haeckel, The History of Creation; Or,
The Development of the Earth and Its Inhabitants by the Action of Natural
Causes, trans. and rev. by E. Ray Lankester, 2 vols.
(New York: D. Appleton, 1876), 1: 361, 2: 325-26, 399; Albanese,
"Dissident History," 178-79·
26.
Blavatsky, Secret Doctrine, 2: 227, 785, 273, 286, 350, 319 (emphases and upper
case in original); see, also, Albanese, "Dissident History," 177-78.
27. Blavatsky,
Secret Doctrine, 2: 483-84, 1: 192-93,274, 639 (emphasis and upper case in
original), 2: 305, 1: 639 (emphases in original); see, too, Campbell, Ancient
Wisdom Revived, 47-48.
28. Blavatsky,
Secret Doctrine, 1: 152-54, 2: 593, 596, 604, 605-11; A[lfred].
P[ ercy]. Sinnett, Esoteric
Buddhism (London: Trtibner, 1883)' Blavatsky
introduced some confusion in her listings regarding the hierarchical placement
of the astral and life bodies, and she reversed them in different lists.
29. Kuhn,
Theosophy, 214; Blavatsky, Secret Doctrine, 1: 178,2: 102-3, 1: 631, 179,
175,2: 185 (emphases and upper cases in original)
30. Kuhn,
Theosophy, 214-15.
31. On misreadings, or "misprisions," see Harold Bloom,
Agon: Towards a Theory of Revisionism (New York: Oxford University Press,
1982), esp. 16-51.
32. J. Campbell
Verplanck, "A Theosophical Catechism: For the
Use of Children, Lesson I;' The Path 5, no. 7 (October 1890): 213-16; J.
Campbell VerPlanck, "A Theosophical Catechism:
For the Use of Children, Lesson II," The Path 5, no. 8 (November 1890):
249-51; "A Theosophical Catechism: For the Use of Children, Lesson III;'
The Path 5, no. 10 (January 1891): 304-7.
33.
"American Branches: Theosophical Society," The Path 4, no. 12 (March
1890): 390; "American Branches: Theosophical Society;' The Path 5, no. 12
(March 1891): 394-95; "Sixteenth Annual Convention;' ibid., 405;
"American Branches: Theosophical Society," The Path 6, no. 12 (March
1892): 408-9; ''American Branches: Theosophical Society," The Path 8, no.
3 (June 1893): 94-96; "American Branches: Theosophical Society;' The Path
9, no. 2 (May 1894): 66-68.
34. See Campbell, Ancient Wisdom Revived,
103-11; Cranston, H.P.B., 45.
For updates
click homepage here