One of the most famous temples of that region is the Vaishno Devi Temple
that is dedicated to the goddess Mata Adi,
and although it is at more than 1’500 meters high on the Trikuta Mountain, it
is an important pilgrimage center for Hindus.
These meetings took place in the
cities of Lahore and Jammu.
The stories that were given about
the meeting that took place at Lahore, I have transcribed here, and I recommend you read them first, so you
have a better chronological understanding of how these events happened.
And the stories about the meeting
that took place at Jammu (which was the next city where they went after leaving
Lahore) I transcribe them below:
TESTIMONY OF DAMODAR MAVALANKAR
Damodar Mavalankar was a disciple
of Master Kuthumi and later when he returned to the General Headquarters in
Adyar (Madras or Chennai), he wrote about the meeting he had with his Master, and his article
was published in a special edition of The
Theosophist magazine with the title:
A GREAT RIDDLE SOLVED
« On my return to the Head-quarters
from the North, where I had accompanied Colonel Olcott on his Presidential
Tour, I learnt with regret and sorrow of further and still more malignant
strictures by certain Spiritists on the claims of the Founders of the
Theosophical Society to be in personal relations with the Mahatmas of the
sacred Himavat.
For me, personally, the problem is of course now solved. It being impossible, I shall not even undertake to
prove my case to those who, owing to prejudice and misconception, have
determined to shut their eyes before the most glaring facts, for “none are so
blind as those who will not see,” as the saying has it.
But I should at the same time [be] considered to have ill performed my
duty were I not to put my facts before those earnest seekers after truth, who
by sincere aspiration and devoted study, have been bringing themselves closer and
closer to the Occult World.
The best way, I believe, to carry conviction to an intelligent mind is
to narrate the facts in as plain and simple a way as possible, leaving
speculations entirely out of consideration.
At the outset I must state what is known to many of my friends and
brothers of the Theosophical Society, viz., that for the last four years I have
been a disciple of Mr. Sinnett’s correspondent. Now and then I have had
occasion to refer publicly to this fact, and to the other one of my having seen
some of the other Venerated Mahatmas of the Himalayas, both in their astral and
physical bodies.
However all that I could urge in favor of my point, viz., that these Great
Masters are not disembodied spirits but living men — would fail to carry
conviction to a Spiritistic mind blinded by its prejudices and preconceptions.
It has been suggested that either or both of the Founders may be mediums in
whose presence forms could be seen, which are by them mistaken for real living
entities.
And when I asserted that I had these appearances even when alone, it was
argued that I too was developing into a medium.
In this connection a certain remark by Mr. C.C. Massey in a letter to Light
magazine of November 17, is very suggestive, inasmuch as that gentleman is
not only far from being inimical to us but is a Theosophist of long standing,
bent solely on discovering truth.
The following extract from the said letter will show how great are the
misconceptions even of some of our own fellow-members:
« Nevertheless, were it an open
question, free from authoritative statement, so that such a suggestion could be
made without offence by one who would, if possible, avoid offence, I should
avow the opinion that these letters, whether they are or are not the ipsissima
verba of any adept, were at all events penned by Madame Blavatsky, or by
other accepted disciples. At least I should think that she was a medium
for their production, and not merely for their transmission.
The fact that through the kindness of Mr. Sinnett I have been made
familiar with the handwriting of the letters, and that it bears not the
remotest resemblance to Madame Blavatsky’s, would not influence me against that
opinion, for reasons which every one acquainted with the phenomena of writing
under psychical conditions will appreciate.
But I am bound to admit that there are
circumstances connected with the receipt by Mr. Sinnett of other letters
signed, “K.H.” which are as regards those, apparently inconsistent with any
instrumentality of Madame Blavatsky herself, whether as medium or otherwise and
the handwriting is in both
cases the same. »
Bearing well in mind the last paragraph in the above quotation, I would
respectfully invite the Spiritists to explain the fact of not only myself, but
Colonel Olcott, Mr. Brown, and other gentlemen having on this tour received
severally and on various occasions letters in reply to conversations and
questions on the same day or the same hour, sometimes when alone and sometimes
in company with others, when Mme. Blavatsky was thousands of miles away; the
handwriting in all cases being the same and identical with that of the
communications in Mr. Sinnett’s possession.
While on my tour with Colonel Olcott, several phenomena occurred (in his
presence as well as in his absence) such as immediate answers to questions in
my Master’s handwriting and over his signature, put by a number of our Fellows,
and some of which are referred to in the last number of the Theosophist,
while others need not be mentioned in a document going into the hands of the
profane reader.
These occurrences took place before we reached Lahore, where we expected
to meet in body my much doubted Master. There I visited by him in body, for three nights consecutively for about three hours
every time while I myself
retained full consciousness, and in one case, even went to meet
him outside the house.
To my knowledge there is no case on the Spiritualistic records of a
medium remaining perfectly conscious, and meeting, by previous arrangement, his
Spirit-visitor in the compound, re-entering the house with him, offering him a
seat and then holding a long converse with the “disembodied spirit” in a way to
give him the impression that he is in personal contact with an embodied entity!
Moreover Him whom I saw in person at Lahore was the same I had seen in
astral form at the Headquarters of the Theosophical Society, and the same again
whom I, in my visions and trances, had seen at His house, thousands of miles
off, to reach which in my astral Ego I was permitted, owing, of course, to His
direct help and protection.
In those instances with my psychic powers hardly
developed yet, I had always seen Him as a rather hazy form, although His
features were perfectly distinct and their remembrance was profoundly graven on
my soul’s eye and memory; while now at Lahore, Jammu, and elsewhere, the impression
was utterly different.
In former cases, when making Pranam (salutation) my hands passed
through his form, while on the latter occasions they met solid garments and
flesh.
Here I saw a living man
before me, the same in features, though far more imposing in His
general appearance and bearing than Him I had so often looked upon in the portrait
in Mme. Blavatsky’s possession and in the one with Mr. Sinnett.
I shall not here dwell upon the fact of His having been corporeally seen
by both Colonel Olcott and Mr. Brown separately, for two nights at Lahore, as
they can do so better, each for himself, if they so choose.
At Jammu again, where we proceeded from Lahore, Mr. Brown saw Him on the
evening of the third day of our arrival there, and from Him received a letter
in His familiar handwriting, not to speak of His visits to me almost every day.
And what happened the next morning almost every one in Jammu is aware of
the fact is, that I had the good fortune of being sent for, and permitted to
visit a Sacred Ashram where I remained for a few days in the blessed
company of several of the much doubted Masters of Himavat and Their disciples.
There I met not only my beloved Master [Kuthumi] and Colonel Olcott’s
Master [Morya], but several others of the Fraternity, including One of the
Highest [maybe Serapis].
I regret the extremely personal nature of my visit to those thrice
blessed regions prevents my saying more of it. Suffice it that the place I was
permitted to visit is in the Himalayas, not in any fanciful Summer Land and
that I saw Him in my own physical body and found my Master identical with the
form I had seen in the earlier days of my Chelaship.
Thus, I saw my beloved Guru not only as a living man, but actually as a young one in comparison with some
other Sadhus [Holly Men] of the
blessed company, only far kinder, and not above a merry remark and conversation
at times.
Thus on the second day of my arrival, after the meal hour I was
permitted to hold an intercourse for over an hour with my Master. Asked by Him
smilingly, what it was that made me look at Him so perplexed, I asked in my
turn:
-
"How is it Master that some of the
members of our Society have taken into their heads a notion that you were an
elderly man, and that they have even seen you clairvoyantly looking an old man
passed sixty?"
To which he pleasantly smiled and said, that this latest misconception
was due to the reports of a certain Brahmachari, a pupil of a Vedantic Swami in
the N.W.P. — who had met last year in Tibet the chief of a spiritual group, an elderly
Lama, who was his (my Master’s) travelling companion at that time.
The said Brahmachari having spoken of the encounter in India had led
several persons to mistake the Lama for himself. As to his being perceived
clairvoyantly as an “elderly man,” that could never be, he added, as real
clairvoyance could lead no one into such mistaken notions; and then he kindly
reprimanded me for giving any importance to the age of a Master, adding that
appearances were often false, &c. and explaining other points.
~ * ~
These are all stern facts and no third course is open to the reader.
What I assert is either true or false. In the former case, no Spiritualistic
hypothesis can hold good, and it will have to be admitted that the Himalayan
Brothers are living men and neither disembodied spirits nor the creatures of
the over-heated imagination of fanatics.
Of course I am fully aware that many will discredit my account, but I
write only for the benefit of those few who know me well enough to see in me
neither a hallucinated medium nor attribute to me any bad motive, and who have
ever been true and loyal to their convictions and to the cause they have so
nobly espoused.
As for the majority who laugh at, and ridicule, what they have neither
the inclination nor the capacity to understand. I hold them in very small
account. If these few lines will help to stimulate even one of my
brother-Fellows in the Society or one right thinking man outside of it to
promote the cause the Great Masters have imposed upon the devoted heads of the
Founders of the Theosophical Society, I shall consider that I have properly
performed my duty.
Adyar (Madras)
7th December, 1883. »
(The Theosophist, December-January,
1883-1884, p.61-62)
WILLIAM TOURNAY BROWN’s TESTIMONY
In
his article, Damodar mentions that "At Jammu again, Mr. Brown saw Master
Kuthumi on the evening of the third day of our arrival there," and about this
event, William Tournay Brown himself mentioned it in a pamphlet entitled “Some
experiences in India,” where he wrote:
«
On leaving Lahore the next place visited was Jammu, the winter residence of His
Highness the Maharajah of Cashmere. Ana at Jammu I had another opportunity of
seeing Mahatma Kuthumi in propria persona. One evening I went to the end of the
"compound" (private enclosure), and there I found the Master awaiting
my approach. I saluted in European fashion, and came, hat in hand, to within a
few yards of the place on which he was standing. After a minute or so he
marched away, the noise of his footsteps on the gravel being markedly audible. »
(Some
Experiences in India. London Lodge of the Theosophical Society)
(Observation:
the original of this Tournay Brown’s pamphlet is extremely rare. It was
published by Dr. Franz Hartmann and Richard Harte, London, under authority of
the London Lodge, T. S. It has, however, been reprinted in The Canadian
Theosophist, Toronto, Vol. XXVIII, No. 4, June 15, 1947, pp. 117-125.)
And it's funny what Blavatsky wrote
to Mr. Sinnett about this double meeting:
« I can not understand why Brown
has been so favored.
What the heck he will have done so holy and good!
All I know is that this seems to
be Kuthumi's second visit personally to him. »
(Letters of H.P. Blavatsky to A.P.
Sinnett, p.105)
And surely this privilege was due
to the fact that Mr. Brown had a very good karma in his favor, probably
generated in his past lives. Unfortunately, Mr. Brown did not know take
advantage of the opportunity given to him, because in order to advance along
the initiatory path it is not enough to be a good person, but also is necessary
to develop a certain temperament, character, discernment and great tenacity.
And the proof is that although he
was fully warned of the difficulties of the path he wished to undertake, in
January 1884, Brown hastily took the decision to stand for probation to become
a disciple, and like many other postulants, failure.
And on this matter, Colonel
Olcott commented that:
«
He was an emotional sentimentalist, quite unfit for practical life in the
world. He had chopped and changed before coming to us, and
has been doing it pretty much ever since; the latest news being that he has
turned Catholic, taken the soutane, kept it on only a few days, became again a
laic. »
(Old
Diary Leaves III, chapter 23)
Instead, Damodar, he succeeds in his
initiatory tests.
COLONEL OLCOTT’s TESTIMONY
Colonel Olcott did not have another encounter with Master
Kuthumi in the city of Jammu, but in his book “Old Diary Leaves,” he testified of Damodar's disappearance for
a few days:
« Damodar had disappeared, and
left no trace behind him as a clue to show me whither he had gone or when he
would return, if ever. I hastily went through the four communicating rooms, but
they were empty; my other companions having gone to the river for a bath.
From Damodar's window I called to
a servant, and learned from him that Damodar had left the bungalow, alone, at
daybreak, but left no message. Not knowing exactly what to make of it, I
returned to my room, and found lying on the table a note from a Master, bidding
me not to worry about the lad as he was under his protection, but giving me no
hint as to his return.
It had taken but a minute or so
to make the circuit of the four inter-communicating open-doored rooms, and I
had heard no messenger's footstep in the gravelly compound; a person could
hardly have entered my room between my leaving and re-entering it, yet here was
the mysterious letter, in the "K.H." writing and familiar Chinese
envelope, lying on my table.
My first instinct was to take
Damodar's luggage—his trunk and bedding—and pack it away under my own cot. I then
dispatched a telegram to Blavatsky, telling her of his disappearance and of my
having no idea as to his return.
When the bathers got back from
the river, they were naturally as excited as myself over the incident, and we
wasted much time in speculations and surmises as to its possible sequel.
I went twice to the Palace that
day and found myself increasingly welcome to His Highness. He showed me every
courtesy, discussed the Vedanta philosophy with evidently deep interest, and
gave me a pressing invitation to accompany him the next time he should go to his
Kashmirian capital, Srinagar.
Just as evening was closing in,
and I was sitting alone, writing, in our bungalow, the others having gone for a
ride on horseback, I heard a step on the gravel outside, and, looking around,
saw a tall Kashmiri-costumed telegraph peon (messenger) bring me a message. On
opening it, I found it to be from Blavatsky, in answer to mine.
She said that a Master had told
her that Damodar would return, and that I must not let his luggage, especially
his bedding, be touched by any third party. That was strange, was it not, that
she, at Madras—i.e., some 2’000 miles away—should tell me to do the very thing
it had been my first impulse to do on finding out the lad's departure?
Was it long-distance telepathy, or what?
There was something stranger yet
to come. To open and read the dispatch had not taken me a minute; the peon had
not had more than time enough to get across the verandah into the compound
when, like a flash, it came to me that the form of the peon was not real but a
Maya, and that he belonged to the Brotherhood.
I knew it, I could swear to it,
because of a certain psychic disturbance caused in me by the approach of one of
those personages; in fact, I could presently identify the peculiar vibration
set up by the mesmeric current of my own Teacher [Morya], who was also Blavatsky's
Teacher.
I ran to the door and looked
across the bare compound, in which were no trees or bushes to serve as
hiding-places, but nothing was in sight: the peon had disappeared as if into
the ground.
I have been asked, when telling
this story, how the transfer of the dispatch from the keeping of the real peon
to the simulated one, and the return of my signed receipt to the telegraph
office, could be accounted for unless the messenger had been a consenting
party.
The thing is very simple,
provided the reality of hypnotic power be conceded. The perfected hypnotism of
the Orient I mean: not the rudimentary stage of it to which the Occidental schools
of Nancy and La Salpètriere have hitherto attained; the secret of Mâya, in
short.
The adept meets the peon; by will-power
prevents his seeing him; causes him to become unconscious; leads him to any
convenient place of hiding; leaves him there asleep; puts the illusive
appearance of the man over his own features and person; brings me the telegram,
takes my receipt, salutes, and retires.
The next moment, the nervous
thrill caused in me by his sympathetic magnetism reacting in himself, warns him
that I am on the alert and will naturally come to the door, so he inhibits my
sight to prevent my seeing him, returns to the sleeping peon, puts the receipt
in his hand, wills that he shall recollect, as if it had happened to himself,
the brief episode of our meeting, awakens him, inhibits his sight, and send him
back to the telegraph office.
A very simple sequence of events,
easily comprehensible for every advanced mesmerist.
_ _ _
It was on 25th November, at
daylight, that Damodar left us: he returned in the evening of the 27th—after an
absence of some sixty hours, but how changed!
He left, a delicate-framed pale
student-like young man, frail, timid, deferential; he returned with his olive
face bronzed several shades darker, seemingly robust, tough, and wiry, bold and
energetic in manner: we could scarcely realize that he was the same person.
He had been at the Master's
retreat (ashram), undergoing certain training. He brought me a message from
another Master, well known to me, and, to prove its genuineness, whispered in
my ear a certain agreed password by which Lodge messages were authenticated to
me, and which is still valid. »
(Old Diary Leaves III, chapter 5)
MADAME BLAVATSKY’s TESTIMONY
And this whole thing, Blavatsky told to Mr. Sinnett in a
letter she wrote to him, and below, I transcribed you the part where she talks
about this theme:
« Adyar,
November 26, 1883.
Well there's news again. Day
before yesterday I received telegram from Jammu from Olcott: "Damodar
taken away by the Masters."
Disappeared!!!
I thought and feared as much
though it is
strange for it is hardly four years he is disciple. I send you both telegrams
from Olcott and Mr. Brown's second one. Why should Brown be so favored — is
what I cannot understand. He may be a good man, but what the devil has he done of so holy and
good!
That's all I know about him that
it seems to be Kuthumi's second visit personally to him. He
is expected here or in the neighborhood by two chelas who have come from Mysore
to meet Him. He is going somewhere to the Buddhists of the Southern Church.
Shall we see
him? I do not know. But there's a commotion here among the chelas.
Well strange things are taking
place. Earthquakes, and blue and green sun; Damodar spirited away and Mahatma
coming. And now what shall we do in the
office without Damodar!
Ye gods and powers of
Heaven and Hell we didn't have work and trouble enough! Well, well Their Master’s will be done not mine. »
(The Letters of H.P. Blavatsky to
A.P. Sinnett, Letter N°30)
No comments:
Post a Comment