Albert Leighton Rawson was a landscape painter who claimed to have traveled to the Middle East where he was initiated, and to refute the idea of those who doubted that Blavatsky had ever been to that region, he sent a letter to the London spiritist magazine Spiritualist saying the following:
TWO MADAME BLAVATSKYS. — THE ACQUAINTANCE OF MADAME H. P. BLAVATSKY WITH EASTERN COUNTRIES.
Sir, — My attention was called today to the letter of Mrs. Showers, in your issue of March 8th last, and, if you will kindly permit, I will try to correct one or more misapprehensions of that lady touching the author of Isis Unveiled — Madame Blavatsky.*
(* Wilkes' Exploring Expedition. Williams' Fiji and the Fijians.)
I had the good fortune to meet Miss Kisllngbury when she was in our city a few months since, and was not aware then that she had been so misled as it would appear she had from Mrs. Showers’s statement. I have not seen any printed statements of Miss Kislingbury. They may have been full of errors, but I doubt if they were, judging by the impression she made on my mind, and which remains yet favourable to her as a woman of fine talent and good sense. But as for my own impressions, and those of my acquaintances who have known Madame Blavatsky in the past, and know her now, concerning her means and methods of obtaining information in the East, it is proper to say that she did not rest contented to look about “as a mere traveller,” but did reside with or near the various peoples, sects, initiates, or who ever was the subject of her inquiries, and as a student of science and religion.
Having had some peculiar experience, I am qualified somewhat to sympathise with Madame Blavatsky in her unpleasant position under the fire of certain critics, who question her personal experience in different countries, and who even go so far as to throw suspicion upon her very identity. Only last week a letter passed under my eye containing inquiries to this effect, written in Aden, in Arabia:
Is the Madame Blavatsky the real Madame Blavatsky who was so well known in Cairo, Aden, and elsewhere a few years since? For if she is, she must have revived, for the real Madame Blavatsky died at her friend’s residence six or seven miles from that city in 1868. The real Madame was a Russian lady of family and fortune, and of considerable literary ability and reputation. She had a large amount of written materials with lier at the time of her death. These materials disappeared, together with an amanuensis, who had been a constant and trusted companion. Is it not possible this amanuensis has assumed the name, rank, and character of the deceased lady?
Good fortune favours the diligent, and Madame Blavatsky is one of tlie most earnest workers in the literary world. The many columns of correspondence from lier pen show thut; and now there comes upon the scene, as if by magic, Madame Lydie de Paschkoff, a Russian countess, member of the Geographical Society of France, of a notable family, great fortune, and a traveller for many years. Madame Paschkoff fortunately knew the Madame Nathalie Blavatsky who died in Aden, and also knows, and has known, for many years Madame H. P. Blavatsky, having met her in Syria, in Egypt, and elsewhere in the East. Others of my acquaintance have met Madame Blavatsky in the far East; others have heard of her residence there; for instance, the eminent physician and surgeon, David E. Dudley, M.D., of Manilla, Philippine Islands, who spent some months in this city recently, and is now on his way to return to his Eastern home; Mr. Frank A. Hill, of Boston, Mass., who was in India some years since. Both these gentlemen corroborate many of her statements.
I have never heard. of such a thing as a visit to a pagoda by a woman, and it is very doubtful if the Madame means to intimate that she was able to break through that ancient wall of priestly prejudice. She has said in my hearing several times that no woman that is known has ever penetrated to the interior — to the secret places of the pagoda. But aside from this, there are ways and means of getting esoteric information. Merely visiting in person the interior of a pagoda, or temple, or any other “secret” place, would afford little instruction. Every student and traveller knows there are brotherhoods "in the East, who have access to all the knowledge, esoteric as well as exoteric, among whom even a woman may move as a student and inquirer. There is no doubt in my mind that Madame Blavatsky was made acquainted with many, if not quite all, of the rites, ceremonies, and instructions practised among the Druzes of Mount Lebanon in Syria, for she speaks to me of things that are only known by the favoured few who have been initiated.
The world may possibly profit by such people as “apostate priests,” if such persons happen to have peculiar information with the ability and courage to make it known. Mrs. Showers would not seriously condemn a priest for an honest change of position; say, for instance, if one should become convinced of the claims and the truth of Spiritualism ; he would be an apostate to the Church, and possibly a gain to Spiritualism. Such a case we had here in Toronto, Canada, a few months since, and the Rev. Mr. Marples (that was) is the Spiritualist lecturer, who is now a very popular man.
I hope you will not condemn me as an “apostate,” if the review of your correspondent’s remarks on the achievements of the Christian Church shall seem to be severe. She says, “Wherever Christianity has planted its standard, it has displaced something that was worse, never anything that was better.”
My studies of the history of the Church have led me to the conclusion that Christianity owes its origin to the doctrines, faith, rites and ceremonies of such sects as the Mithra worshippers, the Gnostics, and the Therapeuts of the early ages of our era, say, before the time Eusebius made the Church history, which has not, and never had, a rival: its unique information is its peculiar property; and yet from it a Spiritualist may learn that what has been claimed as the peculiar property, through Divine revelation to the Church by its apostles, was known to the world for ages before the Church was in existence, and by the same familiar means by which we get such information nowadays, and which some churchmen, denounce as “humbug,” “delusion,” and other phrases, indicating to such as have had personal experience in some peculiar matters, that the church men are simply inexperienced — we need not use a stronger term, nor question their integrity.
Will Mrs. Showers undertake to doubt the personal experience of another lady on the ground of her want of knowledge of any similar experience in her own life?
I think not.
It is the opinion of some students of history that Christianity did displace a better faith, or, at least, a better condition of society, when it drove out of society the broad toleration of the Greeks and Romans, and substituted the narrow intolerance of the Church. One result of this change was the decay of the fine arts throughout the Levant and Europe and Asia Minor generally, followed by the Dark Ages, when knowledge outside of the Church was next to impossible, and the works of the fine arts were only safe underground. Modern scepticism has done more to open the doors of knowledge to the great body of humanity than ever the Church did. Literature, the arts and sciences, were never more widely and earnestly studied since the days of the Academy of the Greeks.
Herodotus tells us a few things about “the feminine attendants round and about the temples” of the Aryan Greeks, which facts may be compared with similar facts concerning the Nautch girls of India, and the “devoted” maids of the ancient Hebrews, as, for instance, Jephthah’s daughter. The ancients made a much wider and more public use of certain symbols of the Creative Rower than do our religious teachers. We do not condemn nor despise such emblems, for they may have a deeper significance than we can know at present.
One would infer from Sirs, Showers’ letter that the Madame did not enjoy an acquaintance among Christians here in New York. I know of several clergymen who have occasionally visited her, and one who is a D.D., and an author of some fame, whom I have met at her house two or three times. His visits seem to be on cordial terms; there was no antagonism nor bitterness apparent at the interviews.
On the subject of the “pools,” we have a living witness in this city in the person of the artist, Mr. Walter Paris, who was in the employ of the Government making sketches and drawings in India, and who says he visited one of the so-called pools. There were near it several fakirs, who slept, ate, and in fact lived where the crocodiles came among them at will, without attempt at mischief to the fakirs, although they were vicious towards strangers, as he found, to his imminent danger when he ventured too near the pool one day. Many other corroborations are ready, if wanted.
On the matter of Madame Blavatsky’s reticence as to her own experience, I may venture a word or two. She chooses to write under cover of the editorial “we,” for she is not a fame hunter, and preferred that impersonal manner of presenting her conclusions in matters relating to science and religion.
In my visits to the. Levant, her name has been frequently met with, in Tripolis, Beirut, Deir el Kamer, Damascus, Jerusalem, and Cairo. She was also, well known to a merchant at Jiddah, who had a ring with her initials, which he said was a present to him from her. His servant, a camel-driver formerly, says he was dragoman and camelji to Madame Blavatsky from Jiddah to Mecca. I inquired of the Shereef of Mecca, but heard nothing of her there. She may have been incog, while there for prudential reasons. My visit was made as a Mohammedan divinity student, and secretary to Kamil Pasha, in whose company I journeyed.
The editor of the Builder of this city, Mr. William O’Grady, a native of Madras, India, visits Madame Blavatsky frequently, having known her in India.
Why repeat these evidences?
One accepted testimony is sufficient — a thousand insufficient to the unwilling soul.
Perhaps the antagonism of Mrs. Showers is due to the apparent hostility of Madame Blavatsky to the present phase of Spiritualism, which makes so much use of spirits.
My experience has led me to the conclusion that far too much im portance has been, and is, attributed to the supposed presence and action of “spirits.” Precisely similar phenomena can be witnessed almost anywhere in the East to those we see in Europe and America, and the actors believe the results proceed from what they understand to be magic. Now, I do not undertake to define between Spiritualism and magic. The result might be Spiritualism with the spirits left out, and some one would quote the saying about the play of Hamlet with the prince left out.
But such is my position. I have so many times seen phenomena here, in Egypt, Syria, in the Greek islands, and elsewhere in the Levant, that it is safe to say I recognise similar appearances when present.
In this city and London, the “spirits” are credited with the work; in the Levant the credit is given to the magic arts. And magic, as all its Eastern adepts have told me, is the discriminating exercise of the educated human Will.
A. L. Rawson, M.D., D.D., LL,D.
34, Bond-street, New York, March 18th, 1878.
[Readers on this side ef the Atlantic are requested not to take further part in this controversy, except to make brief statements of facts, er there will be no end to it. Those on the other side have now a right to be heard. — Ed.]
(Mr. Rawson's letter was published under those titles in the Spiritualist magazine, April 5, 1878, v. 12, n. 14, p.165-166.)
OBSERVATION
It is highly unlikely that either Rawson or Blavatsky ever visited Mecca because neither of them knew the Quran, they knew Arabic, and, to make matters worse, they risked being killed if discovered because visiting the place is prohibited for non-Muslims.
Also, it was discovered that Albert Rawson was a very deceitful and deceitful man, so we must be cautious about what he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment