Masonic, Occult and Esoteric Online Library
H.P. Blavatsky As I Knew Her
By Alice Leighton Cleather
Charges Of Fraud And Trickery
I come now to the most unpleasant part of my task, and will deal with it as briefly as possible. It is, as I havesaid, a new aspect of Mr. Sinnett's attitude towardsH. P. B. in his public writings, and involves him in atangle of inconsistencies and false reasoning from whichhe tries in vain to extricate himself by an untenable theoryof " multiple personality."
Even in the very first trifling phenomenon H. P. B.performed at his request at Simla, he showed his inability to form a balanced judgment. As the Editor of the Occult Review points out (April, 1923) he quite failed to appreciate the fact that the cigar-holder she produced out of her pocket at his suggestion was the most unlikely thing any woman would have about her; and H. P. B., being a Russian, smoked cigarettes without a holder. That Mr. Sinnett describes himself as speechless at the inadequacy of the test, only shows his own lack of intelligence. Further on (Chap. VI) he begins to accuse H. P. B. of fabricating letters from Masters when their contents do not suit his plans ; as, for instance, whenhe was trying to use Mrs. Holloway as an " intermediary." In discussing the S. P. R. Report, he now for the first time states his belief that " she sometimes stooped to simple cheating " and even " employed the Coulombs, husband and wife, as confederates in trickery." Yet, in the same breath, he declares he is " absolutely sure that she possessed powers over matter entirely eclipsing those possessed by ordinary mankind, no matter how deeply versed in science." Then he relates absurd examples of childish trickery in delivering letters from Masters, such as asking M. Coulomb to drop it through a crack in the roof, or someone else to put it in the person's pocket unobserved ! That these Coulombs were utterly discredited employees who had to be discharged for causing serious trouble at the Adyar Headquarters, and sold fabricated evidence to the Madras missionaries, as Mr. Sinnett has shown in previous writings, now counts with him for nothing, although on page 40 he states his firm belief in the genuine character of the celebrated " Shrine " which (as altered by M. Coulomb) figured so prominently in the S. P. R. Report as a trick cupboard with a trap door behind it.
After all this he makes a very lame attempt to explain the problem by a theory that H. P. B. was apt to be " careless " about her body, and sometimes lett 68 it unguarded, so that an evil entity got in, " who designed the sham phenomenon to bring discredit on her and possibly to disgust myself." This sort of thing reminds one of the ridiculous and far-fetched explanations that some of the earlier scientific sceptics had recourse to when confronted with Spiritualistic phenomena, many of which are now being proved genuine under strict scientific tests. Even the " bladders and muslin " that have figured so often as an explanation of materialisations, and were also applied to the " astral apparitions of the Mahatmas" (S. P. R. Report), have now to give way before the scientific evidence of a plastic astral substance called " Ectoplasm," which is stated to have been weighed, photographed, and even analysed in certain laboratories.*
A letter from H. P. B. herself to Mr. Sinnett is quoted (p. 80) without any sort of comment, or theleast realisation of its application to the futility andabsurdity of his own attitude. The following extract speaks for itself :
" Of course you all who believe and respect theMasters cannot without losing every belief in them thinkme guilty. Those who feel no discrepancy in the idea of filthy lying and fraud even for the good of the cause being associated with work done for the Masters are congenital idiots. One capable of believing that suchpure and holy hands can touch and handle with no sense of squeamishness such a filthy instrument as I am nowrepresented to be are natural born fools or capablethemselves of working on the principle that ' the endjustifies the means ' . . . . Had I written even one of those idiotic and at bottom infamous interpolations now made to appear in the said letter ; had I been guilty once onlyof a deliberate purposely concocted fraud, especially whenthose deceived were my best, my truest friends nolove for such a one as I. At best but pity or eternal contempt."
In the relation she held with the Masters H. P. B. could scarcely have been of a lower occult status thanwhat is known as an "Accepted Chela," which is nomore than she herself claimed to be. The MastersThemselves called her " Our Brother H. P. B." whichcertainly implies a higher status. As she wrote to Dr. Hartmann in 1886, "the Adepts would never divulge themselves fully to anyone, unless one did as I did passed seven and ten years probation and given proofs of absolute devotion, and that he, or she, wouldkeep silent even before a prospect and a threat of death. I fulfilled the requirements and am what I am." Amongthe qualifications necessary for such a chela are Absolute physical and mental purity,* unselfishness of purpose, truthfulness and unswerving faith in the law of Karma> and a courage undaunted in every emergency, even by peril to life." (See " Ohelas and Lay Chelas " by H. P. B.). And in an article on " The Theosophical Mahatmas," she says : " Ever since 1851 that I saw myMaster bodily and personally for the first time, I have never once denied or even doubted Him, not even in thought. Never a reproach or a murmur against Himhas escaped my lips, or entered even my brain for one instant under the heaviest trials. . . Unswerving devotion to Him who embodies the duty traced forme, and belief in the Wisdom collectively, of that grand mysterious, yet actual Brotherhood of holy men is myonly merit, and the cause of my success in Occult philosophy."
This is the devoted being whom Mr. Sinnett can conceive capable of fraud, deception, and even jealousy ; and can suggest that she could be capable of such " carelessness " as to permit her body to be occupied by " an evil entity " apart from the fact that her Master's protection, due to that unswerving faith, would make it impossible. As to her " violent temper " and other characteristics to which he takes exception ; if he had studied and understood her better and more impersonally, as many others were able to do, he would soon have discovered that everything she did had a definite purpose. He mentions her " rough language " to, and " tyranny " over, Colonel Olcott, omitting to add that he was her occult pupil and, as such, his very strong and troublesome personality had to be severely disciplined if he was to be of any use for real work. He himself confesses that some of the Adepts who took him in hand gave him up in disgust ! The fact that she treated others, such as Dr. Keightley or Mrs. Cleather with uniform kindness, and while not neglecting her duty as to discipline, never got really angry with them, proves that she gave to each what was best suited to their individual needs. Thetestimony of Dr. Keightley and Mr. Charles Johnston (See Life and Work, p. 73) form a striking contrast to Mr. Sinnett's essentially petty and personal point of view. Dr. Keightley says : " I am positive from long observation of her actions that there was a purpose in all her acts and words, and that it depended on the observers how much they might profit by the lesson."
Mr. Sinnett obviously failed to see this, and so profited not at all, because from the very first he persisted in regarding H. P. B. as an ordinary person possessed of exceptional powers rather than as a trained Occultist who had achieved by years of terrific effort complete mastery of her instrument, and used it always with conscious responsibility and sure knowledge in the fulfilment of her mission. Is it conceivable that the Masters could possibly entrust such a tremendous task to one less qualified ?
One other point should be touched upon. Mr. Sinnett, like Colonel Olcott, always opposed the esoteric basis of the Society, first embodied in the Benares Constitution of 1879, which both of them studiously ignore. (See Life and Work, Chaps. V and VIII.) Mrs. Cleather has there shown that when H. P. B. was driven from India in 1885 the Society quickly degenerated, and "proved a dead failure on all those points which rank foremost among the objects of its original establishment [i.e., the Benares Constitution]. Thus as a 'Universal Brotherhood.' ... it had descended to the level of all those societies whose pretensions are great, but whose names are simply masks nay, even SHAMS . . . " (p. 48). There was no hope of its "redemption," as H. P. B. saw, save in the formation of " a group in which all the members, even if unacquainted with one another, work for each other, and by working for all work for themselves that the great Exoteric Society may be redeemed and made to realise that in union and harmony alone, lie its strength and power." .... (p. 66). Thus she revived the original ideal of the Masters, and formed the Esoteric Section at London, in 1888.
Mrs. Cleather's own personal experience when she joined (ante, p. 16) proves what a very real thing it was under H. P. B. That it has become degraded and misused for base and worldly ends since her death is no fault of the principle in itself, but of the unworthy and unfitted who obtained control of it. It is quite evident from the provisions of the Benares Constitution that the Masters wished to make the Society fundamentally an Esoteric School for the training of earnest aspirants, under the Eastern rules, for the Path of Adeptship. Hence the three Sections: for Initiates (including the Masters Themselves), Accepted, and Probationary Chelas, respectively. But the worldly, intellectual element represented by Olcott, Sinnett, and others, thrust all that into the background, and insisted on an exoteric body, even removing the words " Universal Brotherhood " from the title, and substituting the formation of a mere " nucleus," as the " First Object."
Mr. Sinnett's narrow view (p. 14) was, that Universal Brotherhood was " adopted in India to attract natives of that country apt to be sore about the prestige of the European residents " ! How different is H. P. B/s conception : " Our Society is the .tree of Brotherhood sprung from a seed planted in the world by the angel of Charity and of Justice, on the day when the first Cain killed the first Abel. During the long centuries of the slavery of woman and the misery of the poor, this seed was watered by all the bitter tears shed by the weak and the oppressed. Blessed hands have replanted this seed in one corner of the earth and another, and in different climes, and at epochs far apart . . . 'Love one another, and love every living creature/ preached the Lord Buddha to his Arhats. ' Love one another/ was repeated like a faithful echo in the streets of Jerusalem." And we who live in the East see the great precept actually lived and practised day by day among the Buddhist peoples, who have never waged a war in the name of their religion, as we are continually doing.
As to the Esoteric School, which also bases its training on this great fundamental principle, Mr. Sinnett loses no opportunity of sneering at it, and tries to make out that it was simply a device of:H. P. B/s to undermine Colonel Olcott's " autocracy " and put herself at the head of a separate body in England (p. 90). That very real and valuable Occult instruction was given to the students is unquestionable ; but Mr. Sinnett will no more admit it than he will recognise the value of The Secret Doctrine, or indeed that H. P. B. knew more than the mere " A. B. C. of Theosophical knowledge." It is as if some new officer of the Great War, writing thereon, presumed to state that Marshal Foch only knew the A. B. C. of " our modern expanded military science."
And yet, while regarding H. P. B. thus, Mr. Sinnett could turn to an " intermediary " who is all, and muchworse, than anything that he now alleges of her, and simply swallow without question everything he says, no matter how fantastic. The trail can easily be traced all through his later books, and we find Leadbeater constantly referred to in such extravagant terms as " brilliantly endowed with super-physical senses," etc. Mr. Sinnett's much vaunted " clairvoyant research " depends on " improved channels " of this description ; but unfortunately for those who depend on this clair- voyant's alleged visions, some of them have been traced to obscure books which doubtless he believed were forgotten.* That many thousands have followed Mrs. Besant and Mr. Sinnett in accepting such a channel as infallible for anything from the life on Mercury to the constitution and shape of the Atom is only one more example of the illimitable depths of human folly and credulity.
