Krishnamurti aM tfie

Volume V, Number 3 Fall 2001

Lookil19 for Ghosts at tfie Eddy Fann

Dowsil19 Up

Demons

Was India's Wisdom Tradition

Undennined 6y Saitkardalrya?

Initiations at Taonnina

AVehicle for the Ancient Wisdom Tradition

Subba Row’s Collected Writings

T. Subba Row: The Collected Writings - Volume 1, compiled by Henk Spierenburg isnow available, with the second volume coming early in the new year. According tothe Publisher’s Note:

This first volume of the T. Subba Row Collected Writings covers such subjects as“The Twelve signs of the Zodiac”, “The Philosophy of Spirit”, “A Personal andImpersonal God” as well as inquiries into Buddhism, the sevenfold principles inman, and a detailed biographical overview. Within these pages the reader mayfind material for deeper spiritual and intellectual reflection and in harmony with

the root ideas of the Theosophical renaissance initiated by Blavatsky in 1875. Subba Row’sgenius lent high energy and insight in this impetus and these two volumes now addsignificantly to the wisdom treasure of the already published volumes of BlavatskyReference Books also compiled by Henk Spierenburg.

To order contact: Point Loma PublicationsPO Box 6507San Diego, CA92166

African Avatars in Nexus

In the latest issue of Nexus magazine (Vol.8, No.5), Tom Dark describes two twentieth centuryAfrican avatars. The stories of these two individuals make for a compelling read as the authorrecounts the greed of modern colonialism and the fight by the oppressed natives for self-determi-nation. These two avatars, Simeon Toko and Simon Kimbangu, played a major role in the freeingof Angola and the Belgian Congo from their colonial masters. Some of the events surroundingthese two could almost come out of the Hollywood movie The Mummy.

This magazine is an invitation for followers of all traditions to enter into adialogue whose goal is Truth and whose means is Universal Brotherhood.

A free sample of Fohat will be sent to anyone you might suggest.Subscriptions can be purchased according to the rates on the Contents page.

H.P.B. LIBRARY

Originally the private collection of Alice Cleather, a personal pupil of HPB, the library containsearly theosophical and related philosophical literature, which may be borrowed by mail.

Also the library offers for sale books written by A. Cleather and some theosophical pamphlets.

If interested, please write for catalogue to:

H.P.B. Libraryc/o Joan Sutcliffe284 Ellis Avenue

Toronto ONM6S 2X2

FOHATA Quarterly Publication of Edmonton Theosophical Society

ContentsEditor

Robert Bruce MacDonald

Managing EditorJoAnne MacDonald

Assistant EditorsRogelle PelletierDolorese Brisson

PublisherEdmonton Theosophical

Society

The pages of Fohat are an openforum dedicated to the pursuit ofTruth, and consequently theviews and opinions expressedherein are those of the authorsand do not necessarily reflect theviews of the publisher unlessotherwise specifically stated.

Any articles or correspondencemay be sent to:

FOHATBox 4587

Edmonton, AlbertaCanada T6E 5G4

E-mail: fohat@telusplanet.netFax: (780) 438-1717

Subscription Rates:1 year (4 issues)

$15.00 Cdn in Canada$15.00 US in U.S.A.$20.00 US international

Become anAssociate of Edmonton TSand help support its efforts.

Additional $10.00Associates receive: ETS Newsletter

Cover Design: Donna Pinkard

ISSN 1205-9676

Volume V, No. 3Fall 2001

Editorial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Letters to the Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Where Are the Boundaries? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54by Dolorèse Brisson

The Original Sankaracarya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57by David Reigle

The Eddy Farm C Then and Now . . . . . . . . . . . 61by Rogelle Pelletier

The Taormina Initiations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64by Rogelle Pelletier

Theosophical Friends Remembered . . . . . . . . . . 67

Archeology, Theosophy, and the Americas . . . . . . 68by Robert Bruce MacDonald

To be featured in coming issues:

Setting a Course ThroughEsoteric Time;

Chac-mool and 1000 Quetzalcoatls

` .

Principle and CompromiseWe live in an age where compromise is the means tosolving the problems of competing interests. Bothsides are asked to give a little in the hopes of arrivingat a compromise that everyone can live with. It mightbe fair to ask why is compromise even considered asa tool for problem solving? In fact, what exactly isbeing compromised? Hopefully, it is not principles,those Truths made self-evident through our life ex-periences. In fact why not just turn to principles togive us a guide as to what the solution to a particularproblem might be?

Dolorèse Brisson, in “Where are the Boundaries?”,takes a look at the growing field of dowsing. Peoplefrom different backgrounds and for many differentreasons are turning to dowsing for solutions to vari-ous types of problems. Dowsing is part of the muchwider field of divination, which is basically an occultscience. Generally, practitioners of occult sciencesmust serve long apprenticeships learning the Laws ofNature before practicing such arts. Now dowsing inits simplest form, searching for a place to dig a well,does not seem to be a dangerous or objectionablepractice. However, are well intentioned dowsers try-ing to manipulate maleficent energies without a clearunderstanding of the Laws of Nature? In their igno-rance are they doing more harm than good? Dowserscan sense and even manipulate to some extent thesevarious energies. Yet, without knowledge of howthese energies work, are they playing in the dark andwill even the best of intentions help them in the end?A sound understanding of principles is important inany practice. When we forget principles and workinstead according to desired ends (good intentions)we can cause even more pain than what we havealleviated.

David Reigle, in “The Original %a kar c rya”, alsodemonstrates how things can go wrong when princi-ples are not adhered to. In academia, arguments arerelied upon to reach conclusions. Any argumentrelies upon assumptions to reach a conclusion. Ifthese assumptions are true then the conclusion mustbe true. When the European Orientalists first lookedat putting a date on the life of %a kar c rya, theynaturally approached the problem with certain biasesthat colored their assumptions. They tended to havereligious backgrounds and wanted the “facts” to be acertain way and, not surprisingly, that is how their“facts” turned out to be. What is sad is that futureacademics followed these trailblazers blindly despitehaving every reason to question their assumptionsand having straightforward and simpler methods fordetermining the facts. Future academics insisted onmaking the same mistakes as their predecessors,ignoring the obvious. The most obvious principle of

academic work would seem to be that you questionthe assumptions of your predecessors, verify themyourself, and from such a verified base continue thework. If you do not do this you can spend your entirelife making brilliant arguments based on false as-sumptions. Should academics make a compromisewith themselves to trust the assumptions of theirpredecessors? Is this the type of “compromise” thatany of us should live with?

Rogelle Pelletier next takes us on a trip taking a lookat “The Eddy Farm—Then and Now.” Although prin-ciples are not looked at in this article, the reason thatwe are interested in this look at history is that it wasat the Eddy Farm where Blavatsky can be seenquestioning the assumptions of the Spiritualists ofher day. It was the questioning of these assumptionsand the offering of a different set of assumptions thatset the foundation of modern Theosophy. As we eachverified these assumptions for ourselves through ourown life experience, they became the principles bywhich we lived our lives.

Some Theosophists forgot these principles and de-ferred instead to the hearsay of the movement’sleaders. Rogelle Pelletier reminds us of this as shelooks at Joseph Ross’ latest book on Krishnamurti inher article, “The Taormina Initiations.” We see howmembers of a Society taught to judge according toprinciples, were willing to compromise these princi-ples and believe instead in the word of a few people,even when the word of these people often contra-dicted established Theosophical principles. That somany Theosophists were willing to compromise theirprinciples indicates that they could not have done thework needed to verify these principles in the firstplace.

Finally, Robert Bruce MacDonald takes a quick lookat “Archeology, Theosophy, and the Americas.” Wecan see how certain theories (Darwinism for example)can persist when certain facts are conveniently over-looked. This again is an unfortunate compromisethat too many academics are willing to accept in orderto protect their careers. It is a case where assump-tions are allowed to continue even when there arefacts that could easily undermine these assumptions.One wonders how many trees are wasted in theproduction of the miles of paper used by many aca-demics in arguments based on false assumptions,simply because these academics were willing to makea small compromise. It should be remembered thatcompromises are always made at the expense ofprinciples, because we have not taken the time toestablish and understand the principles.

n a a

n a a

editorial

52 FOHAT

Letters to the Editor:

Madame Blavatsky’s book of Dzyan cannot really becompared with the Western translations of the TibetanBuddhist Scriptures referred to by G.J. Schueler for anumber of reasons given by H.P. Blavatsky herself inher Magnum opus The Secret Doctrine. Here are someof them.

Madame Blavatsky, when commenting on A.P. Sin-nett’s book Esoteric Buddhism states that this bookcontains some of the Dzyan hidden tenets but it is notBuddhism. She affirms this on the first page of herSecret Doctrine, Vol.I (xvii):

This is said with reference to the prevailing dou-ble mistake (a) of limiting Theosophy to Bud-dhism: and (b) of confounding the tenets of thereligious philosophy preached by Gautama, theBuddha, with the doctrines broadly outlined in“Esoteric Buddhism.” ANY THING MORE ERRO-NEOUS THAN THIS COULD BE HARDLY IMAG-INED.” ��������� ������� ��� ���� ��� ���� ����

H.P. Blavatsky then goes on to explain the title ofSinnett’s book should have been Esoteric Budhism, i.e.Budhism with one “D” which means “Wisdom”, thus“Esoteric Budhism” or “Esoteric Wisdom.”

Incidentally she provides in the first part of the SD sometenets of the Wisdom Religion that are quite contraryto the Buddhist Sutras as they are translated by West-ern experts in Pali, Sanskrit et al. As an example, shesays that Theosophy “proves the necessity of an abso-lute Divine Principle in nature. It denies Deity no morethan it does the Sun” ������ ���. The scholars of Buddhistscriptures stress that Buddhism is a religion of athe-ism. (A well known rendition of a Sutra has Buddharefusing to tell a monk whether man has a soul or hasnot a soul.)

Madame Blavatsky then goes on to explore what theStanzas of Dzyan really are:

Furthermore, the records we mean to place be-fore the reader embrace the esoteric tenets of thewhole world since the beginning of our humanity,and Buddhistic occultism occupies therein onlyits legitimate place, and no more. Indeed, thesecret portions of the “Dan” or “Jan-na” (“Dhyan”)of Gautama’s metaphysics — grand as they ap-pear to one unacquainted with the tenets of theWisdom Religion of antiquity — are but a verysmall portion of the whole. ������ ���

HPB further maintains that she had available to her oralteachings. G.J. Schueler certainly would not be able toaccess this material. Madame Blavatsky explains:

Indeed, that which is given in these volumes isselected from oral, as much as from writtenteachings. ������ �������

She then informs her readers what the stanzas of theDzyan are:

The “very old Book” is the original work fromwhich the many volumes of Kiu-ti were compiled.. . . Tradition says, that it was taken down inSenzar, the secret sacerdotal tongue, from thewords of the Divine Beings, who dictated it to thesons of Light, in Central Asia, at the very begin-ning of the 5�� (our) race; for there was a timewhen its language (the Sen-zar) was known to theInitiates of every nation. . . . ������ ������

Gautama Buddha lived from approximately 620 BC toabout 543 BC and Tzongkapa many hundreds of yearslater. These two teachers were thousands of years laterthan the very beginning of the 5�� race when theStanzas of Dzyan were taken down. And again, the twonever left anything in writing: all their Sayings wereusually taken down by priest disciples. Also, as HPBremarks, the main keys of their works are not availableto scholars.

Some comments by G.J. Schueler certainly have noauthority. He says: “In fact, her Secret Doctrine isprimarily a lengthy commentary on the Book of Dzyan.This mysterious work was said to be of Tibetan origin.”Madame Blavatsky certainly contradicts him when shementions the very old book which was taken down inSENZAR at the very beginning of the 5�� (our) race,which is at least a million years ago. See the SD, pagexliii. She does not say it is of Tibetan origin, thousandsof years later.

Another remark of his: “Blavatsky equates this to theHindu god, Parabrahm.” On page 6 of The Secret

Doctrine Madame Blavatsky replies about Parabrahm:“Parabrahm is not ‘God,’ because It is not a God.” Shethen goes on to explain the term “Parabrahm.”

His interpretation of The Secret Doctrine in his “Recon-ciliation” is his own personal ideas of what she meantand it is certainly not what other scholars of The Secret

Doctrine can accept. His playing on words and mean-ings just appear to be scholastic hair-splitting thatobscures real meaning rather than elucidating pro-found metaphysical concepts.

Meanwhile, let us study The Secret Doctrine with re-newed vigour.

���� ����� ���

�� ������� �� Pacific Rim Theosophist

On Schueler’s Blavatsky and Buddhism

FALL 2001 53

Where Are the Boundaries?Dolorèse Brisson

Grasping a forked stick in his hand, a man strollsacross a field. The stick or divining rod, by

mysterious and seemingly irrational means, is forceddownward indicating the presence of water, mineralsor treasure. Either by working directly at the site orfrom a distance, he locates the whereabouts of ma-terial that would have otherwise been hidden to thesenses. He calls himself a dowser (dowser #1). Cling-ing to a divining rod, a second man — a multipurposedowser — ventures far beyond unearthing hiddentreasure and water. He is very adventurous in na-ture and taps into the Universe unrestrictedly toobtain a wealth of information and secret knowledge.He heals people and rids them of evil spirits, findsmissing persons and neutralizes adverse noxiousenergies. He also calls himself a dowser (dowser #2).Is dowser #1 operating within safer margins thandowser #2?

Divination is the prediction of future events or thediscovery of secret matters by looking at signs or byusing occult techniques. There are over 100 meth-ods of divination known to man, such as lithomancy,geomancy, cleromancy and cartomancy. Dowsing isalso considered to be a method of divination. Some-times referred to as radionics or radiesthesia, it is asold as man. There is nothing to interpret, unlikeother methods of divination such as augury whichrequires the study of the behaviour of birds prior todivining by this method. Also, unlike other forms ofdivination, dowsing has no symbols, omens, oranalogies, nor are there obvious passive states suchas trance. By projecting an intent of what is desired,a dowser receives confirmation through the body. Bysimple “yes” and “no” answers through the move-ment of a dowsing instrument, it is an automatic andunconscious process. The successes in accomplish-ing a set task outnumber the failures. Returning toour examples, both dowsers apply the same basicprinciples, knowledge and understanding of thedowsing system. The dowsing system assumes thatknowledge is innate in all things. If you tune in byusing a dowsing instrument this innate knowledgewill be made manifest.

Dowser #2 asks a simple, clear and concise questionon what is to be resolved; he is focussed, calm anddetached. (Our focus is on dowser #2 unless other-wise indicated.) He must not be biassed — he desiresan answer and seeks only the truth. The motivemust be pure and serve the highest purpose. Themost favourable course of action will then be re-

vealed. Training and practice usually lead to a gooddowsing skill; an untrained brain-mind can overridetrue responses. The dowser can practice on himselfor other people, places, events, plants or animals.

Dowsing systems and methods are numerous andcan be used by anyone. Many different dowsinginstruments other than the rod can be used, such asa pendulum (anything one can hang on a string orthread) or a bobber (a flexible rod, wire or branch).Acting as a visual aid to penetrate the veil betweenthe senses — normal waking consciousness — andthe unconscious, dowsing tools are used to measureenergies, vibrations and electromagnetic fields. Forexample, when doing energy healing one can dowsethe body of a patient before and after a treatment andmeasure the energy changes.

This method of analysing the unknown transcendstime and space. Trying to explain the “how” and“why” of dowsing is a mind-boggling experience.How does one get sensory information from theunconscious to the conscious mind? What is thisinteraction between the mind of the dowser and theenergy of the object of interest? No one can agree onone single explanation. Does an external force guidethe instrument or does an internal force emanatefrom the dowser? Does his neuro-muscular systemact like wires that connect the intuitive part of hisbrain-mind to the dowsing tool? How and why itworks when it does remains unsolved. “Dowsersbelieve that they are endowed with a finely tunedfaculty which reacts to the presence of certain ob-jects, causing muscular contractions that affect therod or pendulum . . .”� be it to known or unknownenergies. In other words the subconscious of thedowser moves his instrument through involuntarymuscle movements. Some claim it is the power ofthe higher self — an exercise of the intuitive faculties.Some postulate communication with angels or devasand the revealing of truth via external divine sources.Others affirm that it is nascent and rudimentary, theintelligence of the animal soul. Opinions in thisregard depend on each individual’s experience andpredicament, be it as a dowser or as a dowser’ssubject. The majority believe it is the result of somesort of beneficent energy or force. There are numer-ous accounts of people in trouble and in need ofassistance in one area or another who are helpedsuccessfully by the dowser. Some negative inci-dents, however, do arise and they should not beignored. Hidden messages lie in these negative oc-

54 FOHAT

currences even if they are not common. The follow-ing is an example.

Recently a potential dowser (dowser #3) enrolled ina weekend dowsing seminar open to the generalpublic to learn more about this fascinating tech-nique. At the very onset, a dark, intense and dis-turbing force in the room was sensed. It did not seemto emanate from the instructors nor from the otherdowsers in attendance. Some were affected to vary-ing degrees while others did not perceive it at all.Upon questioning the instructors, who had manyyears of dowsing experience, and a few other dowsersin the room, it turned out that the all-consumingforce had been overshadowing the last few seminarsand no one had answers as to who, what, where,when, or why. They were also unable, throughstrenuous efforts, to get rid of the invasive presence.It felt so harmful and destructive that dowser #3could not bear it and was forced to abandon theseminar midway through the second day. Recogniz-ing the sincerity, honesty and good motive of theinstructors and the other dowsers at the seminar,none of them would have wilfully or consciouslycalled forth such hideousness. The instructors hadthe reputation of having done much good and havinghelped a lot of people. What then was it, and whathad attracted it? What could have gone so terriblywrong? If motive is everything, then why and howwould so altruistic a practice attract this type ofenergy?

Dowser #3 thought that overall the disclosure ofoccult philosophy and information presented at theseminar was accurate and true. Applying dowsingskills to certain areas of life seemed quite acceptable,but it would seem that some boundaries werecrossed that should have been left to the domain ofpowerful and wise adepts who have full control overthe forces of nature and full awareness of the forcesat play. What becomes of the undesirable or darkforces when a dowser clears people, places, etc. ofthem? While running the appropriate program (thatis, instructions with a plan of action to accomplishan end; encoding), the dowser asks that the sus-pected harmful entities or energies being disposed ofbe sent to the spirit medicine doctors, sent to thedark side of the Universe, or that they be transmutedor transformed into beneficent forces. But is thishow Nature works? Not being adepts, the belief thatany one of these three transplantations or transfor-mations actually occur is a blind assumption on theirpart. Most dowsers are average people without thewisdom and knowledge required to render harmlesssuch energies hence making the manipulation ofNature’s dark forces dangerous. Not being under theguidance and protection of a spiritual Master, thedowser places himself at risk even though he hasmethods in place to protect himself. Always being

careful not to delve where he should not he will askthrough the dowsing system for consent. A “yes”answer gives permission to proceed and a “no” an-swer means he should cease the program. The dows-ing rule is to follow Universal Laws. That is a goodthing but how well, as a humanity, do we actuallyknow the Laws? Almost certainly, we don’t haveknowledge of more than a fraction of the UniversalLaws. Herein lies the crux of the dangers involvedwith this area of dowsing. The dowser is not awareof the effects of manipulating these energies, whichunknown to him, may cause him harm or impactothers negatively. For example, with healing, impu-rities can be released into the surroundings whichcan be picked up by others. Disease cured in oneperson can be transplanted into another. In Paracel-sus we read:

This is called the transplantation of diseases;and diseases may . . . be transferred uponother persons; and many practices of sorceryare based upon that fact. In this way dis-eases can be cured in one person and causedto appear in another. . . .�

That the mission is accomplished with seeminglypositive results does not necessarily exonerate thedowser’s ignorance of what is going on behind thescenes, regardless of how altruistic the intent. Truehealers are few and are pure and virtuous, many ofwhom are born under the protection and guidanceof divine Beings to accomplish their life’s work. As tothe cause and nature of the undesirable presence atthe seminar, one can only speculate. With certaintyit was not the result of any benign interaction.

Are dowsing responses then the result of external orinternal stimuli? Let us suppose that an externalforce is working through the instrument. The dowsercould unknowingly be influenced or manipulated bynegative forces or entities. H.P. Blavatsky (referringto so-called “gods” as “spiritus elementorum”) hasthis to say:

Most decidedly . . . there are good as well asbad spirits, beneficent and malevolent “Gods”in all ages. The whole trouble was and stillis, to know which is which. . . . “Ancientdivination was always accomplished with thehelp of the spirits of the elements. . . .”�

If we are to believe the teachings of AmmianusMarcellinus, he maintained that divination was ac-complished not through the help of divine Beings,but by creatures of the elemental kingdoms. Hestated that,

“The spirit pervading all the elements, seeingthat they are eternal bodies, is always andeverywhere strong in the power of prescience[divination], and as the result of the knowl-edge which we acquire through varied studies

FALL 2001 55

makes us also sharers in the gifts of divina-tion; and the elemental powers, when propi-tiated by divers rites, supply mortals withwords of prophecy, as if from the veins ofinexhaustible founts.”�

These theories limit dowsing to the travails of nature-spirits or elementals. Although not everyone wouldagree with this, many spirits no doubt love to leadmen into error.

Let us now suppose that the Higher Self is actuallyworking through the dowser. Intuitive knowledgetranscends reason and surpasses the highest use ofthe senses. Intuition is related to the imponderable,and reason, the great doubter as some call it, belongsto the material world. When the brain is at rest andwhen reason has done its best and failed, then thesoul is able to throw down the images of its ideasupon the clear unruffled surface of the mind. In thissense dowsing could simply amplify what we arealready perceiving but not paying attention to orrecognizing. According to Paracelsus:

The rationale on which divination, geomancy,the practice of the divining-rod, &c., is based,is that by means of such practices a knowl-edge in regard to certain things, such asalready exists in the spirit of man, may cometo the understanding of the intellect of hisown personality. The inner man cannot, un-der all circumstances, communicate hisknowledge to the external man, because theconsciousness of the two is not identical; butthe spirit may influence the nerve aura of theperson and control the muscles of his body,and thus guide his hands.�

A dowser need not be imbued with a lot of knowledge.This lack is probably to his disadvantage. “The DualAspect of Wisdom” and “Psychic and No�tic Action”are two articles written by H.P. Blavatsky. Pureno�tic action belongs to the higher Manas, and theterrestrial psychic element is common to both animaland man and is the lower self. This is the dualelement in man. The articles make reference to AstralLight or the “Old Terrestrial Serpent”:

Blessed is he who has acquainted himselfwith the dual powers at work in the ASTRALLight; thrice blessed he who has learned todiscern the Noetic from the Psychic action ofthe “Double-Faced” God in him, and whoknows the potency of his own Spirit — or“Soul Dynamics.”�

Along the same lines of thinking, Paracelsus’ viewswere adopted by Eliphas Levi when he wrote,

Divination and prediction by mere sagacitydemand a profound knowledge of the laws of

Nature, a constant observation of phenom-ena and their correlation, the discernment ofSpirits by the science of signs, the exactnature of analogies, and the calculation, beit integral or differential, of chances andprobabilities.�

Given that dowsers do not have a profound knowl-edge of the occult, it can be safely assumed that theyare working in the realm of the psychic and are atthe mercy of elemental forces.

It is interesting to note that by and large the dowserbelieves he is generally unable to find the object ofhis search without a dowsing device. He also believesthat for his talent to work he has first to focus hismind on the object of his search. Dowsers know ofcourse that the implement cannot do the work itself.The rod by itself possesses no virtue but is theinstrument to discover all that he wants to do orknow. He must have the dowsing ability.

It is chiefly when in doubt that the average personmakes an appeal to dowsing. Motives include fear,enemies, illness, desire for gain, happiness, etc.Some theorize that after the degeneracy of mankindwhen the real tokens of true divination were lost,humanity continued to seek counsel and informationthereby accounting for the hundreds of methods ofdivination in practice today. Dowsing is one formthat has been used by mankind through the ages.Moses is often depicted holding up a staff whilepreaching to his people. Did it also serve as adivining rod?

Whatever is really going on, dowsing is very popularand is being practiced today by thousands. Howmany are practicing blindly? What is the ideal dows-ing situation? Dowsing probably has no negativeconsequences in areas such as one’s own personalhealth and the like, but in other areas boundariesneed to be set. The question also arises whether ornot certain areas of dowsing are bordering on psy-chism, channelling and mediumship, clairvoyance,magic or some other form of paranormal activity. Isdowser #2 infringing on any of these domains?Dowser #1’s divining rod is used as an instrument ofnatural magic and belongs to the domain of magnet-ism. Dowser #3 dowses once in a while when chal-lenged with health issues or when making decisionson serious matters such as employment or the pur-chase of some expensive item or property, but by andlarge leaves the dowsing system alone.

Dowsing is a very interesting activity indeed andperhaps, once man has reconnected with or purifiedhis own true nature, divination will once again findits natural place. Until dowser #2 becomes fully

. . . continued on page 69

56 FOHAT

The Original SankaracaryaDavid Reigle

The once universal Wisdom Tradition, whoseexistence was made known to the modern

world by H. P. Blavatsky, had been preserved for longages in the utmost secrecy. So when Blavatskybrought out a portion of it, she was faced with theproblem of making these now unheard of teachingsplausible. To address this, she attempted to estab-lish the probability of the existence of such a tradi-tion, and to support the correctness of its teachings,by reference to known authors. For this support shedrew heavily on the teachings of %a kar c rya. Butit would seem that the %a kar c rya referred to byBlavatsky and the %a kar c rya whose writings haveconditioned Indian thought for the last dozen centu-ries or so are not the same person.

%a kar c rya, the preceptor ( c rya) %a kara, isregarded by Blavatsky as a great teacher of theWisdom Tradition, or the Esoteric Philosophy. In herprimary work, The Secret Doctrine, he is referred toas “the greatest Initiate living in the historical ages,”�

and as “the greatest of the Esoteric masters of India.”�

The philosophy promulgated by him, the advaita ornon-dual school of Ved nta, is there called the near-est exponent of the Esoteric Philosophy.� This isbecause the Esoteric Philosophy, the Wisdom Tradi-tion, is non-dual like %a kar c rya’s advaita school,�

as opposed to the qualified non-dualism ofR m nuja’s vi ist dvaita school, or the dualism ofMadhva’s dvaita school, of Ved nta. So we are led tobelieve that %a kar c rya, as a great Initiate, wasfully versed in the Wisdom Tradition; and that evenhis public teachings, the non-dual advaita school ofVed nta, provide the best available support for itsteachings.

This assumption is further strengthened by theamount of attention given to the question of%a kar c rya’s date in the important series of arti-cles called, “Some Inquiries Suggested by Mr. Sin-nett’s Esoteric Buddhism.”� This series is believed tohave been written (or caused to be written) by threeMahatmas, or adepts in the Wisdom Tradition.� Itsimportance is that it purports to give replies basedon the definite information held by the Mahatmasrather than on speculation. But despite this rareopportunity for direct knowledge, and as predicted byBlavatsky who thought this lengthy series was acolossal waste of the Mahatmas’ time,� the answersgiven were not accepted then, nor are they now.

The then prevailing opinion, accepted by both West-ern scholars and their Indian counterparts, was that

%a kar c rya lived in the eighth century ����� An

article in this series, after examining the variousspeculations of European orientalists on this ques-tion, gives the true date of %a kar c rya’s birth fromthe secret records:

We may perhaps now venture to place beforethe public the exact date assigned toSankaracharya by Tibetan and Indian Initi-ates. According to the historical informationin their possession he was born in the yearB.C. 510 (51 years and 2 months after thedate of Buddha’s nirvana), . . .

This was published in The Theosophist for 1883. Thenext article to appear in The Theosophist on%a kar c rya’s date, a detailed three-part study bythe Pandit of the Adyar Library published six yearslater, consciously ignored this information and con-cluded that “we may not be far from truth if we saythat he lived somewhere about the 5� century A.C.”��

Other articles followed in The Theosophist, proposingother dates.��

Meanwhile, discussion of %a kar c rya’s date con-tinued in earnest in the orientalist journals. From1882 to 2000 more than thirty articles and books onthis question appeared.�� K. B. Pathak had in 1882proposed the specific date of 788 ���� for the birth of%a kara, based on a chronogram in an obscuremanuscript he found.�� Most of the writings thatfollowed this also favored dates in the eighth century����, many arguing for 700 or 750 ���� rather than 788���� A few, however, proposed 509 ������,�� in remark-able agreement with the date put forward by theTibetan and Indian Initiates. This date of 509 ������,moreover, comes from the very sources that onewould most expect to find %a kar c rya’s date pre-served in: the records of the mathas or monasticcenters established by him.

%a kar c rya is said to have founded mathas at thefour cardinal points of India: the Jyotir matha nearBadrinath in the North; the Govardhana matha atPuri (Jagannath) in the East; the K lik matha

(% rad p tha) at Dwaraka in the West; and the%r gerF matha (again, % rad p tha) at Sringeri in theSouth. In addition to these four, he is said to havefounded the % rad matha (K makoti p tha) at Kan-chi, also in the South. Each of these mathas has hada succession of pontiffs, who hold the title%a kar c rya, from the time of the original or first( di) %a kar c rya. Their traditional lineage lists

n a an a a

n a a

n a a a a n

a

n a a

a a s aa

n a a

a

n a a

n a a

n a a

n a a

n a a

n

n a a

n a a

a aa a i

n a a i

a a a i

n a aA n a a

.‘

--

. .

.

..

..

.

. .

. ...

.

FALL 2001 57

(guru-parampar ) give the names and usually thedates of each successive pontiff of that particularmatha. The list of the K lik matha in the West givesfor the birth of %a kara the date 2631 of the Yudhis-thira era, corresponding to 509 ������

�� The list ofthe % rad matha (at Kanchi) in the South gives thedate 2593 of the Kali Yuga era, also corresponding to509 ������

�� It is significant that two different lineagelists from two widely separated mathas, having 77and 68 successors respectively, both go back in anunbroken line to 509 ������

The list of the Govardhana matha in the East doesnot give dates, but has 144 successors, about twiceas many as the above two mathas have.�� This is dueto the circumstance that at this matha the successorsare normally those who have gone through the house-holder stage of life before becoming renunciants(rather than doing so immediately after the studentstage), so are older when they are chosen to become%a kar c ryas.�� So this list, too, supports the dateof 509 ������ The list of the Jyotir matha in the Northhas not yet been recovered (except for some recentcenturies), since it was lost when this matha ceasedto function between 1776 and 1941 ����

� Even so,this matha in its current publications accepts thetraditional date of 509 ������ The list of the %r gerFmatha in the South gives for the birth of %a kara thedate 3058 of the Kali Yuga era, corresponding to 44������

�� This list, however, having only 35 succes-sors, gives an improbable reign of 785 years for thesecond successor.�� It does not seem to be regardedas reliable by this matha, since their current publi-cations give instead of 44 ������ for %a kara’s birththe commonly accepted later date of 788 ����

�� Thusthe Jyotir matha, whose lineage list is incomplete,accepts the traditional date of 509 ������, while the%r gerF matha, whose lineage list is imperfect, ac-cepts the later date of 788 ���� The other threemathas, in accordance with the lineage lists pre-served by them, all give the date of %a kara’s birth as509 ������

There are also other traditional sources that confirmthe date of 509 ������ One would next expect to findthe date of %a kara in the various biographies of himpreserved in India. But the available biographies,written in Sanskrit, have proved to be of little help onthis, sometimes giving astrological aspects of hisbirth, yet strangely, not the year.�� There are, how-ever, a few inaccessible but more informative ones.Far and away the most important of these is the fullBrhat a kara-vijaya written by Citsukh c rya.��

Citsukh c rya was a life long companion of %a karawho says he “never departed from %a kara from thetime he left his native place until he attained hismarvellous BrahmFbh va,”�� that is, died. In otherwords, “he was an eye-witness of the life and doings

of %a kara from start to finish, and one of his directdisciples.”�� This biography gives full details of%a kara’s life, with dates. Although this rare text isnot found in libraries, T. S. Narayana Sastry managedto obtain a manuscript of it, from which he broughtout material in a book in 1916.�� Sastry in anotherplace quoted in full its section on %a kara’s birth, inthe original Sanskrit, and translated this into Eng-lish. It gives the date 2631 of the Yudhisthira era,corresponding to 509 ������

�� Sastry also managedto obtain copies of two other biographies not nowfound in libraries: the equally rare Pr c na a kara-vijaya by nandagiri, and a version of theVy s cal ya a kara-vijaya by Vy s cala. Each ofthem gives, using different word-numbers, the date2593 of the Kali Yuga era for his birth, again corre-sponding to 509 ������

�

There is also epigraphic evidence supporting the dateof 509 ������ for %a kara’s birth. This is a copperplate inscription addressed to %a kara by King Sud-hanvan of Dwaraka, dated 2663 of the Yudhisthiraera, corresponding to 477 ������, the year of %a kara’sdeath.�� Since %a kara died at the age of 32, thisplaces his birth in 509 ������

This evidence seems quite convincing; yet it is disre-garded by modern scholars, who consider it meremyth. For example, leading Indologist Hajime Naka-mura in his influential book, A History of EarlyVed nta Philosophy, devotes forty pages to the ques-tion of %a kara’s date.�� Before setting out his owntheory that “he probably lived, roughly, 700-750[����],” Nakamura says he “will carefully go into thetheories advanced hitherto on the dates of %a kara,”noting that “I think that what is cited below will haveexhausted all the important theses.”�� Yet he doesnot so much as mention the view that %a kara wasborn 509 ������ His section, “The Traditional Theoryof the % kara School,” deals with the 788 ���� birthdate, hardly the traditional theory.

Of course, scholars such as Nakamura are not fools,and there are good reasons for disregarding the dateof 509 ������ and for concluding that %a kara musthave lived in the eighth century ���� For example,%a kara’s commentary on Brahma-s tra 2.2.18-32 isa refutation of Buddhist doctrines developed in boththe older Sarv stiv da school and in the newerVijñ nav da school. A fifty-year gap between thedeath of the Buddha and the birth of %a kara is notnearly enough time for at least these latter doctrinesto have developed. To allow for this, proponents ofthe 509 ������ date have advocated pushing back thedate of the Buddha to 1800 ������

�� But besides thefact that this conflicts with the time period of theBuddha as found in traditional Southern Buddhistsources and as determined in general by modern

a

a an

a a

n a a

nn

n

n

n

n

S n a aa a n

n

a

n

n

n

a i S n

Aa a i n a a

nn

nn

a

n

n

n

an

n

n u

a aa a

n

S

. .

..

.

.

.

..

.

.

.

..

.

.

..

.

.

. .

. .

58 FOHAT

scholars, and also the date of the Buddha as givenby the Mahatmas, it still does not solve the problem.%a kara in his commentary on these verses quotesmaterial from the Buddhist writer Dign ga and refersto material from the Buddhist writer DharmakFrti,who are dated in the fifth and sixth centuries ����,respectively.�� Thus %a kara could not have livedbefore then.

There is an obvious solution to this dilemma, but tomy knowledge none of the advocates of the 509 ������

date have yet proposed it (nor has anyone else, forthat matter). They take great pains to show that the788 ���� date actually refers to one Abhinava or “new”%a kar c rya, not to the di or “original” %a ka-r c rya. This Abhinava %a kar c rya was the 38�

pontiff of the % rad matha at Kanchi, who achievedwide fame during his lifetime, and the details of hislife have been confused with those of the first%a kar c rya.�� Thus are explained the two conflict-ing sets of parents, places of birth, and places ofdeath, found in the varying biographies.�� Theseadvocates even admit, here agreeing with Westernscholars, that of the more than four hundred worksattributed to %a kar c rya, many must actually havebeen written by later %a kar c ryas of the variousmathas. But no one, neither Indian nor Western,questions that the commentary (bh sya) we have onthe Brahma-s tras is by the original or di%a kar c rya.�� This work is taken to define di%a kar c rya. This and the commentaries on theother two of the three pillars of Ved nta (prasth na-traya), namely, on the Upanisads and on the Bha-gavad-g t , form his major works.

Already in 1888, when Blavatsky gave in The SecretDoctrine the esoteric tradition that the Upanisads hadbeen greatly abridged at the time of the Buddha, sheindicated that we do not have the original commen-taries on them by %a kar c rya:

%rF %amkar ch rya, the greatest Initiate livingin the historical ages, wrote many a Bh shyaon the Upanishads. But his original treatises,as there are reasons to suppose, have not yetfallen into the hands of the Philistines, forthey are too jealously preserved in his mathas(monasteries).��

Then in 1896-1897 some extraordinary articles ap-peared in The Theosophist, written with the collabo-ration of a blind pandit who could recite from memorya large number of lost Sanskrit texts. One of thesearticles stated that the now current commentary by%a kar c rya on the Bhagavad-g t is not the genu-ine one, but rather is by N ge\vara Bhatta. It thengives a quote from the genuine one.� In another ofthese articles the authors offered “to give to the worldthe genuine commentary, if not precluded by unfore-

seen and unavoidable events.”�� The “unforeseenand unavoidable events” may have been an allusionto the authors’ concern over the lack of acceptanceand even antagonism these articles met with amongthe orthodox readers of The Theosophist. Of course,the genuine commentary never came out. In anycase, the above indicates that the extant commentar-ies on the Upanisads and on the Bhagavad-g t

attributed to %a kar c rya may not be the originaland genuine ones.

But it is %a kar c rya’s commentary on the Brahma-s tras that modern scholarship, both Eastern andWestern, takes as the one unquestionable work of

di %a kar c rya. It is used as the standard by whichto judge the authenticity of all the other works attrib-uted to him. This work presents us with a dilemmanot only because it quotes and refutes Buddhistwriters from the fifth and sixth centuries ����, morethan a millennium after %a kara is supposed to havelived, but also in regard to the unique Theosophicalteaching of the relationship between %a kara and theBuddha. In brief, this esoteric teaching is that theBuddha’s astral remains, i.e., his intermediate prin-ciples, provided the middle principles for the avat ra

%a kara.�� Thus there was a close relationship be-tween the two of them. It is therefore inexplicable toTheosophists when the %a kara who wrote the extantBrahma-s tra commentary has these choice words tosay about the Buddha and his doctrine:

From whatever new points of view the Baud-dha [Buddhist] system is tested with refer-ence to its probability, it gives way on all sides,like the walls of a well dug in sandy soil. Ithas, in fact, no foundation whatever to restupon, and hence the attempts to use it as aguide in the practical concerns of life are merefolly.— Moreover, Buddha by propoundingthe three mutually contradictory systems,teaching respectively the reality of the exter-nal world [the Sarv stiv da system], the real-ity of ideas only [the Vijñ nav da or Yog c rasystem], and general nothingness [the % n-yav da or Madhyamaka system], has himselfmade it clear either that he was a man givento make incoherent assertions, or else thathatred of all beings induced him to propoundabsurd doctrines by accepting which theywould become thoroughly confused.— So that—and this the S tra means to indicate—Bud-dha’s doctrine has to be entirely disregardedby all those who have a regard for their ownhappiness.��

The obvious solution is that the Brahma-s tra com-mentary, taken to be the one definite work of theoriginal %a kar c rya, and the standard by whichthe authenticity of all the others are judged, was in

na

n

n a a A na a n a a

a a

n a a

n a an a a

au A

n a a An a a

a a

i a

n a a

a aa

n a a i a

a

i a

n a a

n a au

A n a a

n

n

a

n

nu

a aa a a a

ua

u

u

n a a

.

..

.

.

.

.

..

.

FALL 2001 59

fact written by a later %a kar c rya. In this way onlycan be explained how this commentary can quote afifth century ���� writer, when %a kar c rya is tradi-tionally supposed to have lived in the fifth century������ The ramifications of this for the study of theWisdom Tradition are far-reaching.

Modern Western scholars have subjected %a kar -c rya’s writings to a type of literary criticism that hadnever been a part of traditional Indian scholarship.They have minutely surveyed the use of characteristictechnical terms in the Brahma-s tra commentary,and compared this usage of technical terms with thatfound in other writings attributed to him. In this waythey have been able to determine that most of thecommentaries on the Upanisads and the commen-tary on the Bhagavad-g t were written by the sameperson who wrote the commentary on the Brahma-s tras, but that virtually all the other writings attrib-uted to %a kar c rya, the many shorter worksincluding the popular Viveka-c d mani, “CrestJewel of Discrimination,” were not.�� For them, thismeans that only these commentaries are genuineworks of the original %a kar c rya. For us, in ac-cordance with the data presented above, this meansjust the opposite.

The major writings of %a kar c rya now extant,namely his commentaries on the Brahma-s tras,Upanisads, and Bhagavad-g t , cannot be reliedupon to support the Wisdom Tradition, since theywere not written by the original %a kar c rya. Theseworks include important doctrines that are contra-dictory to the teachings of the Wisdom Tradition, andalso contradictory to those of some of his otherwritings; that is, ones that scholars consider spuri-ous but that we must consider genuine. Thus, PanditN. Bhashya Charya writes in The Theosophist for1890:

The other works, such as Apárókshánubhúti,Átmánátmavivéka, Vivékachúdámani and Át-mabódha cannot be his works, for they are inmany respects in contradiction with philo-sophical conclusions found in his [Brahma-]Sútra, Upanishad, and Gitá Bháshyas.��

It is only some of his shorter works, such as the onesjust listed, that can be relied upon to support theWisdom Tradition, since it is only these that we canassume were actually written by the original%a kar c rya.�� The Brahma-s tra commentaryand the other long commentaries were not yet avail-able in English when Blavatsky drew on%a kar c rya’s teachings for this support.�� Onlysome of his shorter works were then available inEnglish, such as the Viveka-c d mani, translated byMohini Chatterji and serialized in The Theosophist,1885-1887.�� It is to some of these shorter works

that we must turn to find the original teachings of theoriginal %a kar c rya.

Sankaracarya on God

Of course, the Brahma-s tra commentary and theother long commentaries by the later %a kar c ryawould no doubt have been based largely on those ofthe original %a kar c rya, but with some very impor-tant changes. The most important of these involveswhat is perhaps the greatest question in Indian relig-ion in the last two millenniums: the question of God.

The teaching of a single non-dual reality called Brah-man, that includes within it the entire universe, hasalways been the hallmark of Advaita Ved nta. Theuniversal self of all, called tman, is identified withBrahman. This impersonal principle goes beyondany conception of a personal God, and is thereforedescribed as the param or highest Brahman, Para-brahman.

But according to the researches of modern scholar-ship, the author of the extant Brahma-s tra com-mentary makes no distinction between the imper-sonal Brahman and the personal God, \vara. Hedoes not even distinguish Parabrahman from \vara.In fact, his theistic interpretation is so pronouncedthat this usage of \vara, the personal God, serves todistinguish his writings from those of other AdvaitaVed nta writers, even his disciples.

. . . G. A. Jacob had observed [in 1893] thattheistic terms in %a kara’s Brahmas tra-bh sya often appeared in passages where thelogic of the system seemed to call for imper-sonalistic and monistic terms, and that%a kara again and again ignored the distinc-tion between param brahma and vara. . . .

. . . the theistic basis or background percep-tible in %a kara’s monistic thought . . . indeedmarks a feature which is of major relevanceto an evaluation of the great thinker’s person-ality and which distinguishes him from otherphilosophers of his school.��

German Indologist Paul Hacker sums up his land-mark study, “Distinctive Features of the Doctrine andTerminology of %a kara,” as follows:

Recapitulating our results so far, we can saythat the words (param) brahma or param t-man are almost always interchangeable with

vara; that vara can in most places bereplaced by (param) brahma or param-

tman; . . .

This use of language is characteristic of%[a kara]. Comparisons with his disciples

n a a

n a a

n aa

u

i a

u

n a au a

n a a

n a au

i a

n a a

n a a u

n a a

u a

n a a

u

n a a

n a a

aa

u

II

I

a

n u

a

ni

n

n

a

i s i s

a

n. . . continued on page 70

.

. .

.

`

.

.

. s

.

.

. .

60 FOHAT

The Eddy Farm C Then and NowRogelle Pelletier

Spiritualism had its origins in North America in 1848with the manifestations surrounding the Fox sistersand what became known as the Rochester [NY]knockings. Spiritualism also flourished in Europeand Russia from the 1850s onward.

Helena Petrovna Blavatsky arrived in New York in thesummer of 1873. In her letter postmarked February16�, 1875, to Hiram Corson, professor of Englishliterature at Cornell University and a leading spiritu-alist at the time, Mme Blavatsky wrote:

I am here, in this country, sent by my Lodge,on behalf of Truth in modern spiritualism,and it is my most sacred duty to unveil whatis and expose what is not.�

In the August 1882 issue of The Theosophist, H.P.Blavatsky, in response to a correspondent’s questionregarding “the principal points in which the Theoso-phists and the Spiritualists differ” replied:

The difference is in our theories to accountfor the phenomena. We say they are mainly,though not always, due to the action of otherinfluences than that of the disembodied con-scious spirits of the dead. The Spiritualistsaffirm the contrary.�

On other occasions Mme Blavatsky attested that itwas her task to educate the Spiritualists about theoccult truth behind these phenomena and to warnof the dangers to individuals willingly exposing them-selves to the manifestations. In a letter to her sister,Vera de Jelihowsky, in 1875, she explained:

[T]hese simulacra of men and women aremade up wholly of the terrestrial passions,vices, and worldly thoughts, of the residuumof the personality that was; for these are only. . . dregs that could not follow the liberatedsoul and spirit, and are left for a second deathin the terrestrial atmosphere. . . .�

Colonel Olcott’s articles in the New York Sun arelargely credited with stirring up interest in the phe-nomena surrounding the Eddy brothers at Chitten-den, Vermont. Shortly thereafter the New York Daily

Graphic proposed that he return to the Eddy Farmand do a series of reports for its publication. ColonelOlcott maintained that he was a neutral observer andthat his years of experience as a war veteran, lawyerand investigator allowed him to scrutinize theseactivities from a scientific perspective. He detailedhis observations in twice-weekly reports to the DailyGraphic over a twelve-week stay at the Eddy Farm inlate 1874. In his reports were included detailedaccounts of manifestations and of his investigations,together with sketches by an artist who had accom-panied him. He also published these accounts oneyear later in a book titled People From The OtherWorld.

On October 14�, 1874, while Colonel Olcott wasdoing his investigative reports, Mme Blavatsky ar-rived at the Eddy farmhouse where she stayed fortwo weeks. In a letter to Dr. Franz Hartmann, shewrote:

I was sent to America on purpose and sent tothe Eddys. . . . I proved to him [Olcott] thatall the mediums could do through (so-called)spirits others could do at will without anyspirits at all; that bells, thought reading, rapsand physical phenomena, could be achievedby anyone who had the faculty of acting inhis physical body through the organs of hisastral body; and I had that faculty ever sinceI was four years old. . . .�

The following year, Mme Blavatsky and Colonel Ol-cott, among others, established the TheosophicalSociety.

Brothers, William and Horatio Eddy were two of fourchildren born to Zephaniah Eddy and Julia AnnMacombs (also spelled MacCombs in some of theliterature). Mrs. Eddy descended from a long line ofclairvoyants and her great-great-great-grandmotherwas actually tried and sentenced to death for witch-craft at Salem in 1692. (She apparently managed toescape and flee to Scotland.) The children inheritedtheir mother’s abilities and from the time they were

����� ��� ��� ������� ���� � ��������� � ������ �������� ����� ������ �� ���� ������ � � ��� ����� ���� �

�!"#$ � �# ��� ������������% &��� �������'� ��� ��� � ����� ( �� �� ) ���� *�+��� �,,-� ��- -�

��������� �� ��� ���� � ������ �������� *��� ����$��� �$ �+$ .$�/�� 0 �� �� �,,1� ��� ��

�!0$��$�� 2 &����� " 3�� &�������� �,,4 � �,,1�% ��� ���� ( ���5� ) ��-� 6��7# �,�1� ���1� 8��� �� �����$��$� !��9��$% �� ��� ����:

FALL 2001 61

born, mysterious sounds and strange voices couldbe heard around their cradles. When they went toschool there were so many disturbances in the vicin-ity of their desks that they were eventually forbiddento attend. Zephaniah, described by Colonel Olcott

as “a narrow-minded man, strong in his prejudices,a bigoted religionist, and very little educated”, appar-ently attempted “to get the evil spirit out of them”�

by beating his little boys and girls to the point ofleaving scars they bore to their graves. Zephaniaheventually realized that money could be made bydisplaying his children’s talents and he hired threeof them out to a showman. They toured all the majorcities in the United States over a period of fifteenyears. As they went from city to city, in various teststo awaken them out of their trances (or prove theywere faking them), they were subjected to all mannerof cruelties and violence, which only further scarredthem physically as well as mentally.

When Zephaniah died in 1862, his children inheritedthe farm. In the early 1870s, after their years oftouring, they returned home. Interest in spiritual-ism remained high. William and Horatio decided toconvert part of the second floor of the house into atheater and they held their first seance on January1�, 1874. In his book, Colonel Olcott described theirabilities:

The Eddys represent about every phase ofmediumship and seership: — rappings; thedisturbance of material objects from a stateof rest; painting in oil and water-colors underinfluence; prophecy, the speaking of strangetongues; the healing gift; the discernment ofspirits; levitation, or the floating of the bodyin free air; the phenomena of instrument-playing and the show of hands; the writing ofmessages on paper upborne in mid-air, by

pencils held by detached hands; psy-chometry, or the reading of character andview of distant persons upon touching sealedletters; clairvoyance; clairaudience, or thehearing of spirit-voices; and, lastly, and mostmiraculous of all, the production of material-ized phantom forms, that become visible,tangible, and often audible by all personspresent.�

Apparently twenty to thirty materialized spirits ap-peared on any given evening, at five minute inter-vals.� Seances were held every night of the weekexcept Sunday.

Colonel Olcott did thorough investigations of thepremises and, in particular, the room where theseances were held as well as the ‘spirit cabinet’ inwhich William would sit behind a curtain while themanifestations occurred. Olcott never found anyindication of fraudulent means to produce thesemanifestations. He came to regard the Eddys as:

[S]laves of the invisible powers back of the“manifestations” who not only obsess them attheir caprice by day while about householdduties, and in the evening during the regularcircles, but pursue them in the silent watchesof the night, playing the pranks of the old-time poltergeists, and making it uncertainwhether or not they will wake in bed or in thecrotch of some tree on the summit of anadjacent mountain.�

In October 2000 the writer, her husband, and ayoung couple accompanying them, had occasion to

��� ��� �� � ��� ��� ! ���� &��� ;�7 ��� �#���$� �� "����$ � ����� .������� ($�� ��� ��, 4� �� -� ���-<9-4�

��� ��� �� � ��� ��� ! ���� &��� ;�7 ��� �#���$� �� "����$ � ����� .������� ($�� ��� ��, 4� �� -� ���<�9<<�

�*� ���� 2 #�� ���$���+��� � � � �$� ;�7 �� �����+$� � �$����$ �#$ #$�+#� 2 ���$�����=$� �������� /# 7 �$���$� �����9��+ �$�� � � ������7' �����$� � � /���� &$ ��� �����+$� 2 � �#$� � $ /$�+#$�� "#$ /$�+#� 2 �$ �����7���� ������ ���9�$� �5 � ���� ����, '+� �����+ �$ $�$���+>� �������� ��

��� ��� �� � ��� ��� ! ���� &��� ;�7 ��� �#���$� �� "����$ � ����� .������� ($�� ��� ��, 4� �� -� ��<1�

��� ���� ���� �� � �������� �� �� ������

��� ����� ����� �� ����

62 FOHAT

go to Vermont and we took it upon ourselves to visitthe Eddy Farm. A drizzly Sunday morning found usat the doorstep of the High Life Ski Club. We weregreeted by Bill Farley, Treasurer (and unofficially,tour guide and jack-of-all-trades), and by Liz Holste,Membership Chair. They graciously answered ourquestions and gave us a tour of the premises. Theyexplained that a group of ten skiers from New Jerseydecided to pool their resources and purchase ahome-away-from-home in Vermont where they oftenwent to ski. In 1969 they found the Eddy Farm andput a down payment on it. They purchased it in 1972for approximately $32,000. Membership in High LifeSki Club grew and the mortgage was paid off in 1987.A nonprofit corporation owns and operates the prop-erty. It runs on a semi-communal basis and provideshotel-code approved sleeping spaces for its members.Membership varies from year to year and has beenas high as 1200 members.

Without precise instructions on how to locate it, wewould not have recognized the place from the nowfamiliar sketch dating from the 1870s. Fire de-stroyed part of the L-shaped house. At some pointin time thereafter the remaining section was turned90 degrees. Whereas it had been facing east towardthe road, it now faces south. It was rumored thatspirits had picked the house up and moved it. Thereis proof, however, that it was raised and, using teamsof horses, given a quarter turn. The house hasserved a variety of purposes since it was built circa1844. Horatio and William died in 1922 and 1932respectively. It is presumed that the farm was stillin the Eddy family’s hands at that time (we made noattempt to ascertain this). It served as a restaurantin the 1950s and then remained vacant from 1959to 1969 at which time the High Life Ski Club becameinvolved. There have been many renovations doneover the years to bring the premises to legislatedstandards but there has also been some preservationwork done to maintain some of the authenticity ofthe Eddy farmhouse.

Our eyes first caught sight of two framed photo-graphs directly in front of us as we were led inthrough the front door. One is of the house as itappears now, the other is a sketch of the Eddyfarmhouse as it appeared then, which was donatedto High Life Ski Club by The Theosophical Society inAmerica in 1988. To the left is the doorway to thedining room/kitchen, to the right is the entrance tothe living room with the fireplace. To the immediateright of the photos is the staircase which leads to thesecond storey which we climbed, following in thesteps (literally) of the many individuals who hadascended them to the seance theater. This area hasnow been divided up but it was pointed out that inone room, which now serves as a bedroom, a penta-gram had been found painted on the floor, presum-

ably a later addition and not connected to the Eddys.In the landing area on this storey there is a flight ofstairs leading to the attic. This space has now beenconverted to ‘mattress-on-the-floor, bring-your-own-sleeping-bag’ quarters. Olcott did investigationshere to ascertain there were no riggings from aboveto the area directly below where the manifestationswere taking place. Bill and Liz stated that no trapdoors or other hidden compartments had been foundduring renovations.

While on the main floor, we had examined some ofthe photographs in the living room. It was noted thatat one time a dam built in the vicinity of the farmcaused the water to rise at the back of the propertyto the point that what had served as the barn in theearly years had been converted to a boat house. Thewater has long since receded and this building is nowbeing converted into a recreation hall.

Upon being asked if anything out of the ordinary isoccasionally reported by overnight guests, our tourguides told us how sometimes in the middle of thenight, when someone goes down to the main floor, alady with long hair has been seen working in thekitchen. The next morning when she is sought out,it is found that she is not among the registeredguests. Another occasional phenomenon is the re-ported sighting of a ball of light floating across thehouse. While there, two of our party did in factwitness this (before being told of other such in-stances).

We bid our gracious hosts good-bye, thanked themfor their extensive tour and for kindly allowing us totake a number of photographs, and we departed.The weather precluded any attempt to visit Honto’sCave, which is located in the nearby woods and isonly accessible by hiking. In describing it Olcottwrote that “[t]he term cave is a misnomer in thisinstance . . . [as it is] formed by the leaning of onegreat fragment of rock against another”. Seanceswere occasionally held there and Olcott reprinted a

��� ����� � !��� �����"�� #$�%�&'�() �� *��������+�, �� �"!����-"������"�� " �� ��.� "( � �� /!'��+��

. . . continued on page 69

FALL 2001 63

The Taormina InitiationsRogelle Pelletier

Krishnamurti: The Taormina Seclusion, 1912 by Joseph E. Ross, published by Joseph E. Ross/BookDoctor, PO Box 1442, Ojai, CA, 93024-1442, 2000, 257 pages. $17.95 US + shipping direct.

In the opening paragraph of his Foreword,editor and compiler, Joseph E. Ross,wrote:

In the many biographies of J. Krishnamurtilittle attention is given to the time he spentduring 1912 in seclusion in Taormina, a vil-lage in Sicily. In that four month period,March through June, Annie Besant and C.W.Leadbeater, then leaders of [the] theosophicalmovement, supervised the preparation offour young people for Initiation into theBrotherhood of the Inner Government of theWorld. . . . It was believed that Krishnamurtiwould be the vehicle of the coming of theWorld-Teacher, the Lord Maitreya. The otherthree young people would be closely associ-ated with Krishnamurti when his ministrybegan.

The book is divided into five sections: INDIA: TheEarly Years; ENGLAND: The European Introduction;ITALY: The Taormina Seclusion; THE MINISTRY:Rise and Fall of the Coming; and THE NEW KRISH-NAJI: A Retrospect. Endnotes and a “Further Read-ing” section complete the book. Nearly 100 pages aredevoted to the Taormina period. The remainder ofthe book follows Krishnamurti’s evolution to thetreading of his own path and the complicationswhich resulted within the Society around the contra-dictions which began to arise between Krishna-murti’s statements and the expectations establishedby C.W. Leadbeater and Annie Besant regarding therelationship between the vehicle and the World-Teacher.

Krishnamurti: The Taormina Seclusion, 1912 providesmuch more detail about this time period than pre-viously published books. While titles such as Can-dles In The Sun by Lady Emily Lutyens, andKrishnamurti: The Years of Awakening as well asKrishnamurti: The Years of Fulfilment by MaryLutyens generally provide summaries of events at

Taormina, Mr. Ross presents circumstances as de-tailed in the words of George Arundale� in his lettersto his aunt/foster mother, Francesca Arundale, towhom he wrote regularly during these four months.There are also letters by/to C.W. Leadbeater andAnnie Besant, among others. Other items includearticles and published addresses by C. Jinarajadasaand Krishnamurti as well as items from EsotericSection (E.S.) publications and extracts from in-structions received by C.W. Leadbeater regardingpreparations for initiations. A lengthy address byMrs. Besant to the E.S. members in London, whichwas originally published as a report, is also reprintedin full. Mr. Ross has very few comments betweenthese items; he simply sets the scene and providesthe source of the material which follows.

A basic definition of the word ‘occult’ is secret ormysterious, and there will always be those who claimto be attuned to this hidden side of things, whetherprojected or genuine. The majority of people, unableto experience this level of sight, are naturally in-trigued with the reports of those who make suchclaims and are, in addition, at their mercy in regardto the information they supposedly collect. Themembers of Edmonton TS studied The MahatmaLetters to A.P. Sinnett in detail for a number of years.A comparison of the Mahatmas’ statements in theseletters with their words in this instance is veryrevealing. It becomes apparent from the study of TheMLs that the Mahatmas generally do not concernthemselves with trivial everyday matters. MasterMorya in Letter 29 wrote: “Life . . . when evenindefinitely prolonged, is too short to burden ourbrains with flitting details — mere shadows.” Inaddition, in Letter 78, K.H., referring to the “Phoe-nix” publishing venture to which the future of Indiawas strongly tied, advised Sinnett: “The Chohan isnot to be consulted every day on such ‘worldly’matters. . . .”� On the other hand in the case ofKrishnamurti, the Mahatmas, up to and includingthe Mahachohan, were supposedly concerned withsuch things as the fabric used for Krishnamurti’s

REVIEW ARTICLE

�*� �#$ ���$� �$ �+$ *������$ /�� ����7���� 2 �#$ �$����� &���� � ��$+$ �� �$���$�� ?����� &$ $7��$ � ���$��� ��� ���$� ���# � �� �#$ 0�$��� ���# ��7 �#��7#� �� /$�� �� � � 96�� �� &$ ��77$$�$� *���$ �$���� �� ��$���$�� 2 "#$ "#$ � �#�97�� � 7�$� 9 *��� 2 �� /��+ #$� �$��# �� �����

���� ������ ����� "#�# $����� 7 ����$� *�"� ���'$�� 2�7�����$ $���� �� "#$ � �#�7�� @���$���� ��$��� ���-�� �� 4���-�,� ��� ,�

64 FOHAT

clothing (nothing but the finest), down to the fit ofhis shoes.�

During the initiation processes detailed in his lettersGeorge Arundale stated on a number of occasionsthat he had “little if any recollection” of the events.More than one year later in a letter dated October 31,1913 to C.W. Leadbeater he wrote: “Do not forget thatI bring back at present no remembrances of whattakes place on other planes, and what the Mastermay say to me is hidden from my physical brain”����1��. Referring to the occasion of his own FirstInitiation during the night of May 31/June 1, 1912,he wrote to his mother that he had included “theaccompanying description made by Mrs. Besant withthe help of Mr. Leadbeater”. He added “You willnotice that for the second time I have had the honourof presentation to the Lord Gautama and of receivinga few words of gracious approval” ����-1�. Also, whileGeorge held no memory of it, Krishnamurti hadapparently remembered seeing Master Morya andMaster K.H. with George on this occasion. A few dayslater Mrs. Besant sent a message to the EsotericSection which included the following: “My dearyoung Brother George Arundale has passed the greatPortal, and has become a member of the WhiteBrotherhood. You will all rejoice with us” ����-��.

Scattered throughout the writings of HPB, as wellThe MLs, emphasis is placed upon the seriousnessand difficulty of the chela’s path and attainment ofthe ultimate goal. During HPB’s lifetime it was notedthat there was only one candidate who successfullypassed the associated tests. It is with some scepti-cism therefore that one reads in Mrs. Besant’s ad-dress to E.S. members in June 1913, one year afterthe Taormina seclusion: “[W]e now have within theSociety no less than seven members of the Brother-hood . . . we have a score of members who are intouch with Masters as Their chelas. . .” ����1��. In theForeword ���,� Mr. Ross points out that “Mrs. Besantand Mr. Leadbeater at this period had previouslytaken the Fourth (Arhat) Initiation.” On p.131, re-ferring to some recent photos taken at Taormina,George wrote to his mother on June 12, 1912: “Thegroup of the 6 of us — all Initiates — has . . . beentaken.” The “initiates” included George Arundale, C.Jinarajadasa, J. Krishnamurti, Annie Besant, C.W.Leadbeater, and Nitya (Krishnamurti’s youngerbrother).�

Krishnamurti had experienced his First Initiation inJanuary 1910 at Adyar. Mr. Ross provides thisconcept of initiation:

In theosophical parlance, initiation is a cere-mony conducted on a superphysical plane,usually at night, while the candidate is asleepand is conscious in his subtle body. Thecandidate undergoes tests to determine hisdedication and worthiness, and his sponsorstestify as to his service to humanity. Duringthe ceremony occult teachings are given andhis powers are expanded. As the candidateprogresses in wisdom, power and service,further initiations may be taken. ��� �

However this is seemingly contradicted in ML Letter49 where K.H. wrote to Sinnett: “The Occult Scienceis not one, in which secrets can be communicated ofa sudden, by a written or even verbal communica-tion”.� It should also be noted that “powers”, orsiddhis, are earned and not conferred.

Taormina, Sicily was the place of seclusion chosenfor this preparation to make Krishnamurti the vehi-cle for the World-Teacher. Krishnamurti, along withJinarajadasa, apparently received their Second In-itiation on the full moon of April 30/May1, 1912 atTaormina. Included in notes, the originals of whichare in George Arundale’s writing (there is no indica-tion whose recollections these were), is the followingaccount of the proceedings:

The Masters grouped Themselves in a semi-circle. . . . The two candidates [stood] betweenthe two Masters who presented them, MasterK.H. and D.K. . . . Behind them stood Sirius[Leadbeater] and Herakles [Besant], the ap-pointed guardians of Alcyone [Krishnamurti]in the lower world. The Manu sat a littlebehind on the right hand of the Boddhisattva,and then shone out above the glorious figureof the Lord Gautama Buddha. . . . Near himwas the Mahachohan . . . and between Themand a little above them flashed out later inanswer to the solemn invocation of the Bod-hisattva, the blazing star of the One Initiator,the mighty King of the Occult Hierarchy, theLord of the World. ���15�

Obviously, very detailed records were kept of theseevents. One is left to wonder, however, if the Masters

�?� �� ���$�$����+ � � �$ �#�� �� !) .$��+� � &�+#$� "#�� "���#% /#�7# ���$��$� �� ��� %������� ��� � ����� 6��7#9*������14� ��$�����$� 2� � ��� "������� ��� � ����� 3$7$�$� ��1<�� ���$�� A �� /�����+ � ��A� 0$��$��$�>� 7 ��$��� �$9+�����+ ����7��� � 2 ��� ������ ����� "#�# $����� ����$�B !��� 6�� 0$��$��$� ����� ��� �$+��� �#�� 0$��$� ) ��5 ���$����$� ��� �2�$� �#$ 0$��$�� /$�$ �����#$�� #$ C���$ 2�$� �� '$ 2 �#$ ' �� � #$����+ �� D�#�� � �����$ '>�%������

��# � � �����$�$�� 2 �� /��+ ���� �

���� ������ ����� "#�# $����� 7 ����$� *�"� ���'$�� 2�7�����$ $���� �� "#$ � �#�7�� @���$���� ��$��� ���-�� �� 4���-,-�

FALL 2001 65

and their superiors would in fact have such personalinterest. In ML Letter 29 Morya writes:

I, am as I was; and, as I was and am, so amI likely always to be — the slave of my dutyto the Lodge and mankind, not only taught,but desirous to subordinate every preferencefor individuals to a love for the human race.�

By 1921 it was becoming obvious that Krishnamurtiwas well on his way to stepping out on his own. Inan address to the Indian members of the E.S. inBenares in December 1921 he spoke at length on “alack of common sense among members . . .” ����,��

and how without this, one cannot understand whatis meant by spirituality �����1�. He emphasized thatone should not accept certain things as unquestion-able truths simply “because an ‘initiate’ says so”���-55�. He also claimed there was “[t]oo much thespirit of subservience. We seem to think that bykilling independence we can get devotion and getnearer the Master” ���-���.

By 1925 Krishnamurti’s relationship with The Theo-sophical Society was becoming tenuous at best andthere was much confusion among the membershipdue to conflicting statements by the leaders of theSociety and by Krishnamurti, who was supposedlythe mouthpiece for the World-Teacher.

In a discussion with Mrs. Besant in August 1927,George Arundale recorded her interpretations of thethen-current situation. There was question as towhether or not Krishnamurti had “full union” with,rather than occupation by, the Lord Maitreya. Uponquestioning her on the possibility that she had mis-interpreted some things in this regard, she appar-ently went out of her body and remained absent fora while. She returned with the following explanation:

As I have never had the experience of beingpresent near the Teacher when a new sub-race was founded and therefore could notknow from my own memory how he was toreturn, my Master showed me — the previouscoming and I described the future one interms of the former. ���--��

In April 1928 in a talk on the consciousness ofKrishnamurti, Leadbeater described that Krishna-murti’s causal body was visible as a funnel, darkerand denser at the bottom, while the higher part “islight beyond anything you can imagine” ���-� � andwas the consciousness of the Lord Maitreya. In hisMay 8, 1928 letter to George Arundale, Leadbeater,referring to the difficulty reconciling Krishnamurti’s

response to the proclamation that Arundale’s wifehad recently been declared the World-Mother (com-plementary to the World-Teacher), wrote:

[W]e have no criterion by which to judge howmuch of the higher plan should be knownthrough the physical body, and consequentlyit would be foolish to allow ourselves be upsetor greatly surprised by anything whateverthat may happen. ���-< �

In his December 1921 address Krishnamurti stated:“I see certain things with a little more clearness thanyou, perhaps because I have climbed a little way upthe mountain — a very little — perhaps because ofthat I see a little clearer” ���-5��. In 1922 he startedgoing through a painful “process” which, as docu-mented in other books on Krishnamurti’s life, lastedseveral years and included debilitating headaches aswell as excruciating pain in his neck and spine on adaily basis.

Krishnamurti was not in favour of rituals. He be-came disillusioned with the pomp and ceremony ofthe various organizations affiliated with The Theo-sophical Society and could not accept the LiberalCatholic Church or Co-Masonry. On August 2, 1929at Ommen, The Netherlands, Krishnamurti formallydissolved the Order of the Star which had beenestablished for the purposes of the World-Teacherand delivered his famous “Truth is a pathless land”lecture. In 1930 he resigned from The TheosophicalSociety.

Joseph E. Ross has presented another very interest-ing compilation of authentic documents which pro-vide a chronicle of events as they unfolded. Further,the presentation includes very little of the compiler’spersonal input. Mr. Ross indicates ���-<�� that thestatus of Krishnamurti as the vehicle of the World-Teacher will be further documented in the forthcom-ing series, in follow-up to Krotona of Old Hollywood,Vol.I, 1866-1913. To be released in future are: Kro-tona of Old Hollywood, Vol.II, 1914-1920; Krotona ofHollywood and Ojai, Vol.III, 1921-1931; and Krotonaof Ojai, Vol.IV, 1932-1994. While there have beenobjections in some quarters regarding the publica-tion of these documents, it should be borne in mindthat the sincerity of all involved at the time is bestdisplayed through their own words. Equally obviousis the willingness on the part of the members toaccept, without much questioning, the declarationsof the leaders. It is a study in human nature and,when viewed objectively, a very interesting one atthat.

���� ������ ����� "#�# $����� 7 ����$� *�"� ���'$�� 2�7�����$ $���� �� "#$ � �#�7�� @���$���� ��$��� ���-�� �� 4���--4�

66 FOHAT

Maritza Forgach de Sordo,Countess of Gymes and Gach

March 23, 1933 - April 16, 2001

It was with sadness that news wasreceived from Ramon Sordo advis-ing of the passing of his lovingwife, Maritza, on April 16�, 2001at the hospital in Cuernavaca,Morelos, Mexico. Maritza had beenvery involved in the reactivating ofTheosophy in Mexico and the es-tablishing of the Fundacion

Blavatsky. She will be greatly missed by her familyand many friends.

Maritza Forgach was born March 23��, 1933 to anaristocratic family in Hungary. Her parents divorcedand her mother remarried in the early 1940s. In 1950the family migrated to Australia where Maritza at-tended the University of Sydney. In Australia in 1954she married a Hungarian Count. Unfortunately in1965 he died in a car accident leaving Maritza awidow with two young daughters. She travelled for awhile and eventually settled in Mexico, first inAcapulco then Mexico City where she began to paintprofessionally. She was well-known in Diplomaticcircles and was fluent in Hungarian, German, Span-ish and English.

Maritza and Ramon met in the autumn of 1976 andbecame re-acquainted at one of her exhibitions heldat a Museum in Mexico City in August 1978. Theymarried on May 31�, 1980. They did a lot of travellingthen moved to Sydney, Australia in 1981. Maritzawas writing a book on yoga and meditation when theymet and she had introduced Ramon to theosophicalconcepts. They joined the Theosophical Society inSydney and within two years of returning to MexicoCity in 1989 became involved with the MexicanSection of the TS. In 1992 they moved to Tepoztlan,Morelos and built their own home there in 1996.Together they regularly attended meetings in MexicoCity (45 minutes north) and Cuernavaca (20 minutesaway).

Over the years they had come to realize that therewas a clear distinction between original theosophical

teachings and what came later. Maritza and Ramonwere instrumental in establishing the independentFundacion Blavatsky: Fraternidad Teosófica in 1995.It was officially notarized as a non-profit associationin October 2000 in Cuernavaca. The Fundacion isdedicated to the promulgation of Original Theosophythrough the translation and distribution of originalwritings, and the establishing of libraries for thispurpose. Together, Maritza and Ramon have done animmense amount of work in translating these textsinto Spanish. In 1993 they started the magazine,Atma Vidya, which has been published inde-pendently through the Fundacion since 1995.

Maritza was not well on Saturday, April 7� andfollowing hospitalization the next day was diagnosedwith a tumor in the right frontal lobe of her brain. Itwas benign but produced swelling of the meninges.As her case was not urgent surgery was scheduledfor Saturday the 21�. Meanwhile she remained inhospital where Ramon visited her daily and theyspent the time reading theosophical materials. Un-fortunately, Maritza went into cardiac arrest on themorning of April 16� and died immediately. Sheappeared to one of her daughters in Australia in avivid dream at that very moment. Ramon took herbody to a funeral parlor in Cuernavaca where, threedays later, she was cremated. Her eldest daughtercame to Mexico to take half of Maritza’s ashes toAustralia.

Maritza had a very sunny disposition and a greatsense of humor. Ramon described her as not know-ing rancor or resentment and very seldom angry; shedid not gossip, was generous to the poor, and indealing with people was simple, direct and kind. Hestated that she was very intelligent but psychic andintuitive rather than intellectual. In the words of oneof Ramon’s aunts, Maritza was “beautiful within andwithout”. The effects of her good works will surelyresound through theosophical circles of Mexico formany years to come.

����

THEOSOPHICAL FRIENDS REMEMBERED

That only which we have within, can we see without. If we meet no Gods, it is becausewe harbor none. If there is a grandeur in you, you will find grandeur in porters andsweeps.

- Ralph Waldo Emerson

FALL 2001 67

Archeology, Theosophy, and the Americas

Robert Bruce MacDonald

Journalist Elaine Dewar, in her recent release,Bones: Discovering the First Americans, chroniclesthe development of archeology in North America.The book is a fascinating read, more for the psy-chology of the modern scientific method and itseminent practitioners than for the credibility of thetheories that they espouse. Many learned archeolo-gists today still believe the Americas were peopledaround 14,000 years ago. There are some, datingthrough new disciplines, who believe the Americaswere settled up to 50,000 years ago and finally,there are the stories of the Native Americans them-selves who believe that they have always been here.Theosophy has always put more credibility in mythand legend than in the speculations of scientists,and after reading Bones, it is not difficult to seewhy.

The Secret Doctrine hints that “the Third Race goesvery far back into the Secondary Age” ��3 ??� �5�. TheFourth Race is claimed to have been at its height fromthe early Eocene to the mid-Miocene. Ruta andDaitya, the last of the large Atlantean islands, sank850,000 years ago during the later Pliocene accord-ing to The Secret Doctrine time line. Of the Americaswe learn that there are parts older than Europe andit is written that:

The India of the pre-historic ages . . . wasdoubly connected with the two Americas.The lands of the ancestors of those whomAmmianus Marcellinus calls the ‘Brahmansof Upper India’ stretched from Kashmir farinto the (now) deserts of Schamo. A pedes-trian from the north might then havereached—hardly wetting his feet—the Alas-kan peninsula, through Manchooria, acrossthe future Gulf of Tartary, the Kurile andAleutian islands; while another traveller, fur-nished with a canoe, and starting from theSouth, could have walked over from Siam,crossed the Polynesian Islands and trudgedinto any part of the continent of South Amer-ica. ��3 ??� �- �

We know Arjuna married Ulûpi, the daughter of aNâga (initiate), around 5000 years ago. This nameis of Atlantean derivation and is probably to be foundwith the Mexicans of that time ��3� ??� -�<�. Therefore,at the beginning of the Kali Yuga there was still someinteraction between India and the Americas. In ad-dition, we know the island continents of Daitya andRuta sank beneath the oceans around a million yearsago, and Blavatsky hints that at that time there is

evidence of civilization in the Americas ��A ??� ��5�.We can assume that as parts of the Americas wererising from the oceans and the Atlantean continentscontinued to sink, there would have been migrationby the Atlanteans to these new lands.

We are given another hint that man was in theAmericas 50,000 years ago as Blavatsky cites alecture by H. A. Allbutt where evidence for this claimis given ��A ??� ��4�. In Isis Unveiled, Blavatsky refersto a newspaper article that describes the builders ofmounds found in Missouri, Kentucky, Ohio, Tennes-see, Mississippi, and Louisiana as giants ��� �� ��. Inan article published on the internet, “Holocaust ofGiants: The Great Smithsonian Cover-up”, theauthor cites numerous archival references to digs allover the Americas that located Giants near eight feetin height � ��������������������� �������� ������������. Ina Canadian Press story by Wendy Cox, “The Peacefulgiants of the Arctic one day just disappeared”, thestory of the Dorset of the Canadian Arctic is given��������� �������� ��� !� ! �. These giants appar-ently disappeared 1000 years ago. In a Nexus Maga-zine article, “And There Were Giants . . .”, JohnMount reprints a picture of a giant first published inStrand Magazine in 1895 showing a mummified bodyover 12 feet tall. In that same article an Inca mythis referred to that, depending on the height of theInca at the time, could place the giants they metwith at 20 feet plus. As Blavatsky writes that“man’s size was reduced from 15 to 10 or 12 feet,ever since the third sub-race of the Aryan stock”,giants of over 20 feet can be placed as older thana million years. Finally, John Robert Colombo’sVoices of Rama, stories of the Native Americans ofCanada, includes a story, “Why People Do Not EatEach Other Nowadays”, that refers to giants. Asthe Atlanteans left their sinking continents for newlands, they took with them not only their giantstature, but their knowledge of pyramid architec-ture and astronomy.

The Secret Doctrine relates a story of the CentralAmerican pyramid of Cholula being built by a race ofgiants ��3 ??� - 12��. Blavatsky later relates that thedescendants of the Atlanteans built the pyramidsfound all over the world ��3 ??� �4-�, and that beneaththese pyramids dwelt the adepts ��3 ??� �4�94-�. Fi-nally, Blavatsky cites a reference that the pyramidswere consecrated to the regents of particular stars��3 ??� �1-�. Mark Vidler, in The Star Mirror, picks upon this theme identifying not only pyramids butparticular mountains all over the world with stars in

68 FOHAT

the sky. These identifications of star and pyramidindicate a profound knowledge of astronomy andarchitecture to the point where only now in the latetwentieth century would we be able to duplicate someof these structures. The Mayan Prophecies by Gilbertand Cotterell again speak of the profound astronomi-cal and mathematical knowledge of the CentralAmericans. In The Mysteries of Chichén Itzá, Adal-berto Rivera A., explores the incredible architectureof Chichén Itzá and identifies this complex withinitiates, India, and the Atlanteans.

Evidence of the age of the Native American peoplescan be found in many places, but the self-styledexperts of modern archeology will believe in only theone million year old skull. Sadly, because they“know”, according to their theories, such evidence tobe impossible they will not even look for it. In addi-tion, given that amateur archeologists were diggingup evidence of giants only 150 years ago, it seemsthat the memories of a modern archeologist are veryshort C a strange quality for those interested in thestudy of the past.

.$2$�$�7$�

� � � � E #� . $��� & ���� � '���� " � �� B � � � � � ����� ���<�

3$/��� �����$� � ���( )��� �����* �� ���� "��������� .��� � & ��$ ������� -55��

���$��� *����� �� ��� 6����7$ 6� � ��$�$��� ��� ����� �� �������� ��$�� �������B ��$�$�� � '� 0����$�� ���4�

6 ���� E #�� !*�� "#$�$ A$�$ ������ � � �%� +��� ( ��,� ) �4� �$��$�$�9;7� $� -55�� ���4�91��

.��$�� *�� *���$�� � ��� �������� � %����,� �-.� 6$��7 � -55��

(���$�� 6��'� ��� $�� ���� �� 0 �� �B &���$�� ������ ���,�

aware of all that is at play in all aspects of hisdowsing, he might best attend to things he cancontrol such as purifying his own nature which

develops the intuition and wisdom required to playthis role, and be motivated by pure noëtic action.

&���� 3 �+���� !3 /���+�%���� ��� � ��*��� ( ��4� $�� .�7#��� ���$����#� )$/ F �'B ��� �����#��+ 0���� �� 5� ��1,<�

�&�������� G���=� ���� � ����������� 0 �� �B H$+�� ����� "�$�7#� "�I�$� � � � 0��� ����,,9�,��

��������'� &���� !"#$ ?� �� ��� �#$ "$���#���% �������� % ������ !����*�� ( ��(??� 7 ��� � ��� �$ J��' 22 $� ��� A#$�� �?0B "#$ "#$ � �#�7�� �����#��+ & ��$� ��, ���4��� ���-� 9-���

*������� 6��7$������� ��� ��� � ' KK?� �#����� ,� �� C� �$� &��� �������' �� !"#$ ?� �� ��� �#$ "$���#��%� �����/��� % ������ !����*�� ( ��(??� ��-�<�

�&�������� G���=� ���� � ����������� 0 �� �B H$+�� ����� "�$�7#� "�I�$� � � � 0��� ����,2��

��������'� &���� !��7#�7 ��� ) L��7 *7�� ��% �������� % ������ !����*�� ( ��K??� 7 ��� � ��� �$ J��' 22 $� ��� A#$�� � ?0B"#$ "#$ � �#�7�� �����#��+ & ��$� ��,5� ��� <�

0$��� ����#��� ��� ����� �� � ��� ��*��� $������� *���� 6�����B "#$ � �#�7�� �����#��+ & ��$� ��--� ���5��

�� ��� �� � ��� ��� ! ���� &��� ;�7 ��� �#���$� �� "����$ � ����� .������� ($�� ��� ��, 4� �� -� ���1-91 �

�!A#$� "#$ ������ A ��� " �7#$� �#���$��$�% E� ��$�$��� 0����� ��+�=��$� E����� ��, � ��� 19,�� �--9�-��

published account of one held May 24�, 1874.

Honto was the name of the spirit native woman who(among others) made her appearance there.

Approximately one-half mile from the house is theEddy burial plot. We located the headstones ofZephaniah (who died July 13�, 1862 at the age of 57years) and Julia (“Wife of Zephaniah Eddy. Enteredthe World of Spirits December 29�, 1872, 59 y’s, 9mo’s, 24 d’s”) as well as a number of their relatives.The stones for William and Horatio were not foundand, I believe, they are not buried in this cemetery.An article found in Yankee magazine stated thatWilliam died “at the tough old age of 99” in 1932.Horatio had died ten years earlier.��

In an article which ran in the Rutland Herald inOctober 1997, titled “Former Seance Center NowSkiers’ Favorite Haunt”, author Ed Barna, referringto the fact that the house might be haunted, wrote:“If [ski club members] were inclined to forget, thepredictable stream of visitors from all over the globewould let them know. . . .” We were among thatsteady stream and were graciously received andprovided with a guided tour. Having read the historyof the early years of the theosophical movement andthe involvement of the founders of the Society withregards to the phenomena which took place there —the Eddy Farm then — it was indeed interesting tovisit its new incarnation — the Eddy Farm now.

. . . Eddy Farm continued from page 63

. . . Divination continued from page 56

FALL 2001 69

are, however, helpful only insofar as theyestablish that the word vara is used veryseldom by them, whereas it occurs very fre-quently in the SBh [%a kara’s Brahma-s tra-bh sya]. At the same time, the concept doesnot appear to have had much systematicdevelopment for them. But in later Ved nta(Pañcada , Ved ntas ra) \vara is no longerconfused with Brahman. He has been givena clearly defined place in the system, namely,He is Brahman associated with m y .

How is this strange confusion on %[a kara]’spart to be explained?�

From our perspective, it is explained by the fact thatthis book was not written by the original %a kar -c rya, but by a later, theistic, %a kar c rya. Thisallows us to understand why virtually all modernAdvaita Ved ntins are theists, believers in God, whenwe know that this belief is not a part of the WisdomTradition; nor, apparently, was it part of the originalteachings of the original %a kar c rya. The Ma-hatma K.H. writes on this in a letter replying to A. O.Hume:

In the first [letter] you notify me of yourintention of studying Advaita Philosophy witha “good old Swami”. The man, no doubt, isvery good; but from what I gather in yourletter, if he teaches you anything you say tome, i.e., anything save an impersonal, non-thinking and non-intelligent Principle theycall Parabrahm, then he will not be teachingyou the true spirit of that philosophy, not fromits esoteric aspect, at any rate.��

The Mahatma K.H. clearly states the position of theWisdom Tradition on belief in God in his letters #10and #22. In brief, this position is as follows:

Neither our philosophy nor ourselves believein a God, least of all in one whose pronounnecessitates a capital H.��

K.H. continues, specifically differentiating Para-brahman from God, \vara:

Parabrahm is not a God, but absolute immu-table law, and Iswar is the effect of Avidya andMaya, ignorance based on the great delu-sion.��

He says that Parabrahman is the one life taught bythem:

We are not Adwaitees, but our teaching re-specting the one life is identical with that ofthe Adwaitee with regard to Parabrahm.��

He reiterates that the one life, or Parabrahman, is notGod:

If people are willing to accept and to regard asGod our ;)� 0?G� immutable and uncon-scious in its eternity they may do so and thuskeep to one more gigantic misnomer.��

He says it does matter whether or not we think of thisprinciple as God:

You say it matters nothing whether these lawsare the expression of the will of an intelligentconscious God, as you think, or constitute theinevitable attributes of an unintelligent, un-conscious “God,” as I hold. I say, it matterseverything, . . .��

A Hindu Adept affirms that Parabrahman is to beunderstood as an abstract principle rather than asGod:

Moreover, I assert that the P*.*�.*&6 of theVedantins and the “Adi-Buddha” of the north-ern Buddhists are identical. Both are Ab-stract Principles, or—non-entities; . . .��

How important is this question of God? In oneIndian’s view, the introduction of the concept of asupreme almighty God into India from the West andits thorough establishment there by %a kar c rya,both in the eighth century ����, brought about theruin of India. He holds that India’s effeteness in thepast twelve hundred years, when it was ruled first bythe Muslims and then by the British, is due to thistheism, which had been so effectively promulgatedthere by %a kar c rya. Of course, this refers to whowe would consider to be the later %a kar c rya. Thisauthor, Phulgenda Sinha, explains how through his-torical research he arrived at this startling conclu-sion:

Considering the whole history of India fromthe most ancient to the contemporary period,I found a distinct dividing line in the literaryand philosophical heritage of the country,making it appear as if there were two In-dias—one which existed from ancient times to800 A.D., and another which came after 800A.D. . . .

India prior to 800 A.D. produced philosophersand writers who accepted Man as the su-preme being. They talked about two mainentities: Purusha (Man) and Prakriti (Nature).. . . Man can liberate himself from dukha[sorrow or unhappiness] and can attainsukha (happiness) by acquiring proper knowl-edge, mastering certain teachings, followingcertain practices, and by working accordingto the Samkhya-yoga theory of action.

i s

n u

a

asi a a I

a a

n

n aa n a a

a

n a a

I

n a a

n a an a a

. . . Sankara continued from page 60

.

70 FOHAT

India after 800 A.D. adopted quite a differentoutlook. The ideas proposed by writers andcommentators were now mostly matters ofbelief and faith, colored by religion, mysti-cism, and caste. Not Man but God was heldto be supreme. Man could do only what waspredestined by God.��

He continues further on, after saying that religioustolerance held sway in India until about the eighthcentury ����:

However, this condition changed when theBrahmans accepted monotheism and beganinterpreting the whole religious history of In-dia, from Vedas to Upanishads, in a com-pletely new way. The most interesting pointsin this interpretation were that the status ofBrahmans as a caste and class was strength-ened, all the gods and goddesses of Vedaswere superseded by a single Almighty God,and religious persecution began with a senseof crushing the enemies. It happened withthe coming of Shankaracharya.��

He begins his section, “An Appraisal of Shankara-charya,” with:

Shankaracharya was the first Indian toopenly accept, propagate, and expound theconcept of monotheism as a part of Hindureligion.�

He concludes his appraisal with this verdict:

India entered into a dark age with the comingof Shankaracharya.��

When reading at a distance %a kar c rya’s philo-sophical treatises on non-dualism, we are apt toremain unaware of the reality of just how theisticallythey are understood in India, and just how pervasivethe God idea is there. In his 1983 study of themodern %a kar c ryas and their followers, WilliamCenkner reports:

Worship is the most significant duty encour-aged by the %a kar c ryas; daily p j is theirconsistent advice. . . . The observer frequentlynotes the worship of personal gods evenamong ascetics of the %a kara orders today;the practice, it is believed, was part of di%a kara’s renovation of ascetical life.��

The popular eclectic worship is based uponthe tradition that di %a kara revived andgave stability to the six alternate ways ofworship, the sanmata-s [i.e., of the six Gods].Ascetics from the %a kara orders have consis-tently worshipped personal gods. %a kara inhis commentary on the G t speaks of the six

attributes of God that correspond to the sixGods, %iva, Visnu, %akti, S rya, Ganapati andKum ra.��

T. M. P. Mahadevan, well-known scholar and expo-nent of Advaita Ved nta, explains that this sixfoldworship came about at the request of six of %a kara’sdisciples.

Admitting the non-duality of the AbsoluteSpirit, they had their own preference in regardto the form of the Personal Godhead.��

After stressing the importance of God in AdvaitaVed nta, he says that this importance is because,according to %a kara’s commentary on Brahma-s tra2.3.41:

. . . it is by gaining knowledge that comesthrough God’s grace that one gets releasedfrom bondage.��

Thus, %a kar c rya is understood in India to havewidely propagated the worship of a personal God,since the grace of a personal God is required forliberation. The prevalence of this teaching largelycoincided with the difficult period in Indian history offoreign domination. However one may choose tojudge the effects of belief in God seen in India overthe past twelve hundred years, this belief is certainlydue in large part to the theistic interpretation ofVed nta by the later %a kar c rya. It would seemthat the pure Advaita teaching of the original%a kar c rya has now become thoroughly overlaidwith theism, as a result of the additions made to thatteaching by the %a kar c rya who wrote the extantcommentaries on the three pillars of Ved nta. Butthis theism, according to the Wisdom Tradition, is notthe teaching of Ved nta as expounded by the original%a kar c rya.

The most fundamental teaching of Ved nta is that ofthe existence of Brahman, the one reality, and of theidentity of tman, the self of all, with Brahman. Theoriginal %a kar c rya promulgated the Advaita, ornon-dual, understanding of this ultimate principle,in direct accordance with the teachings of the Wis-dom Tradition. This non-dual principle, the one life,is the most essential teaching of the hidden WisdomTradition. For bringing this teaching out, the worldis indebted to the original %a kar c rya.�� Nowhereelse in all the world’s sacred writings was this taughtin its fullness and its purity. The task now beforethe student of the Wisdom Tradition is to separatethis original teaching of the original %a kar c ryafrom its later accretions, which go under the samename.

[For a copy of the notes please write to: Eastern Tradition

Research Institute, 3185 Boyd Rd, Cotopaxi, CO 81223.]

n a a

n a a

n a a u a

nA

n

A n

nn

i a

ua

an

an u

n a a

a n a a

n a a

n a aa

an a a

a

a

n a a

n a a

n a a

. .

. . .

30hat is the Steed, 71wught is the 2?ider

,Jtis the "bridge" by which the ",Jdeas" existing in the "rnivine 71wught" are impressed on Cosmic substance as the "laws of ::Nature." 30hat is thus the dynamic eneroy of Cosmic ,Jdeation; or, regarded from the other side, it is the intelligent medium, the guiding power ofall mani~station. ... 7hus from Spirit, or Cosmic ,Jdeation, comes our consciousness; from Cosmic Substance the several vehicles in which that consciousness is individualized and attains to self - or r4f.ective - consciousness; while 30hat, in its various manifestations, is the mysterious link between ~ind and ~tter, the animating principle electrifying every atom into life. - Secret rnoctrine I, 16

/-- - " FOHAT ,/ ' ~- -- Box 4587 .~~ Edmonton, Alberta ~ Canada, T6E 5G4

@Recycled Paper