COLONEL OLCOTT: Not necessarily or
ordinarily, but the sensation of solidity can be given at will, if the double is that of
an adept and he wishes to make that impression upon your mind.
MR. STACK: Then there have been cases
where the double has given the sensation of touch to the person to whom he appeared?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Yes.
MR. STACK: Have you yourself ever
actually touched a double?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Yes, but of a Mahatma.
MR. STACK: Not of an ordinary person?
COLONEL OLCOTT: No.
MR. STACK: As to the projection of the
doubles of such Mahatmas as have also been seen in the flesh, can you testify to the two
parts of that --- that you knew the Mahatma as an ordinary man and on other occasions have
seen his double?
COLONEL OLCOTT: I can.
MR. MYERS: In the case of one or two
Mahatmas?
COLONEL OLCOTT: I could name two cases
where I have encountered the person both in the physical body and in the astral
body. There are also a number of instances in my experience where I have seen the
person in the astral body but not in the physical, and in the physical but not in the
astral; but in two cases I can state that I have known the person in both capacities.
MR. STACK: You need not mention all, but
mention the two instances close together in which you saw a man in the flesh, and a short
time afterwards saw him in the astral body, and under what circumstances?
COLONEL OLCOTT: In both cases I saw them
in the astral body first.
MR. MYERS: Will you mention, first, the
circumstances of the apparition?
COLONEL OLCOTT: The first case I will
mention is the case already reported in the pamphlet called “Hints on Esoteric
Theosophy --- No. 1,” to which I refer you. (See Appendix XV.) In that instance the person was my Teacher,
whose photograph lies on the yable here; and I now exhibit the turban which he took off
his head, when I demanded of him some tangible proof of his visit. (Turban
produced.)
MR. MYERS: With regard to that visit as
narrated, I wish to ask whether you have a precise recollection as to the condition of the
door, whether it was shut or locked? I wish to see on what ground you think it
impossible that this was a living Hindu who left the apartment by ordinary means.
COLONEL OLCOTT: In the first place, I
never saw a living Hindu before I arrived in London on my way to India. I had had no
correspondence with anybody until then, and had no knowledge of any living Hindu who could
have visited me in America.
MR. MYERS: Of course, the idea of the
apparition would be that it was somebody paid by Madame Blavatsky.
COLONEL OLCOTT: The answer to that is
that the man who visited me was instantly recognised by me from a portrait which I had in
my possession --- the portrait which you see there.
MR. MYERS: But that portrait was formed
under the direction, to a certain extent, of Madame Blavatsky?
COLONEL OLCOTT: She was present, as well
as myself, in the room while it was being drawn, but she gave no instructions as to how it
should be drawn.
MR. MYERS: Was the Hindu you saw in New
York indisputably the same as you subsequently saw in India?
COLONEL OLCOTT: The same.
MR. MYERS: And whom you saw in the astral
body?
COLONEL OLCOTT: The same.
MR. STACK: He suddenly appeared?
COLONEL OLCOTT: He appeared when I was in
my room before retiring at night. As it was my custom to lock my door, I presume
that my door was locked at that time. I know that the door was not opened, for I sat
in such a way reading that the door could not be opened without immediately attracting my
notice.
MR. MYERS: In the description which you
gave you said that the door had made no noise in opening if it had been opened. Do
you consider it possible that it may have been open? Or do I understand that you now
deny that?
COLONEL OLCOTT: I used that expression so
as to leave the widest possible latitude for any theory of that kind. My own
conviction is --- in fact, I should be willing to affirm most positively --- that the door
did not open and that the appearance and disappearance of my visitor occurred without
using the means of ingress or exit.
MR. STACK: In fact, you were in the habit
of locking your door every night then?
COLONEL OLCOTT: And then we were in an
“apartment house,” where the exterior door of the suite of chambers was closed
with a spring latch. Of course, everyone, in such a case, invariably locks his own
door leading into the outer passage; so that a person, to get in, would have to ring the
bell.
MR. MYERS: Then you conceive that there
were probably two locked doors?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Yes.
MR. MYERS: Although you knew that that
was a needless precaution?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Not so, because in New
York houses burglars get in by windows and various ways.
MR. MYERS: Who lived in your suite
of apartments besides yourself?
COLONEL OLCOTT: That was the headquarters
of the Society, and Madame Blavatsky and I lived there; and during the greater part of the
time there were lady or gentlemen members of the Society stopping with us as
visitors. Whether there were actually visitors in the house or not at the time I
cannot remember.
MR. STACK: Judging from your
expression as to his materialising his turban, your impression is that the Hindu who
presented himself to you was not material?
COLONEL OLCOTT: It would hardly be fair
to say that, because I do not believe that there can be any appearance, either phantasmal
or other, without the presence of matter. It would be better to say that he was in
the state of an etherealised body.
MR. STACK: The question is, is it a
tangible body?
COLONEL OLCOTT: It is but faintly
tangible, unless there is some special condensation of it by the will of the Mahatma.
MR. STACK: At his will he could make it
tangible or intangible?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Yes, as well as in the
case of so-called “materialised spirits,” of which I have seen more than 500 in
my time, at the Eddy Homestead. In that case the phantoms were sufficiently
ponderable to be weighed in a weighing machine.
MR. MYERS: But Mr. Stack’s question
was directed to this, whether you conceive that the rest of the phantom which appeared to
you in New York was of equal solidity with the turban?
COLONEL OLCOTT: The phantom man had a
phantom turban on his head, and he fully materialised the turban only by drawing to it
through the current --- electric, odic, astral, ethereal, or whatever you please --- which
is constantly running between the projected phantasm and the body, all the residual
coarser atoms of the head cloth upon the solid body left behind.
MR. MYERS: How tall was the Hindu who
appeared to you in New York?
COLONEL OLCOTT: He was a model of
physical beauty, about 6ft. 6in. or 7in. in height, and symmetrically proportioned.
MR. MYERS: That is a very unusual height,
and is in itself a tolerable identification.
COLONEL OLCOTT: Great stature is not so
rare among the Rajpoots.
MR. MYERS: I presume that you were
impressed by his height in New York?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Yes.
MR. MYERS: Have you seen other
Hindus of that height?
COLONEL OLCOTT: No; I have seen very tall
Hindus, for I have been through the Rajpoot country; but taking him all in all, he was the
most majestic human figure I ever laid my eyes upon.
MR. STACK: Are there any cases where you
and another saw the double at the same time?
COLONEL OLCOTT: You will find in “Hints
on Esoteric Theosophy” a number of instances of such apparitions. I am
personally acquainted with all the witnesses, and I believe them to be, without exception,
men worthy of perfect credence.
MR. MYERS: Were you yourself among the
groups in several instances?
COLONEL OLCOTT: I was.
MR. MYERS: But in instances other than
those recorded in the pamphlet?
COLONEL OLCOTT: At various times, when I
have been addressing public audiences, I have seen one or more of these Mahatmas in the
audience, and other persons present have seen them.
MR. STACK: When the other persons present
see them, is the perception similar to that reported of clairvoyants, that they have a
special power? or is it that the Mahatmas make themselves visible to certain persons and
not to others?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Speaking of appearances
of that kind in a large audience, it would be impossible for me to say how many persons
saw them. My own opinion is that the perception was absolutely of the ordinary kind,
and not clairvoyant, although in some cases I know of clairvoyant perception of Mahatmas
having been had without other persons present seeing them.
MR. MYERS: When one of the Mahatmas
appeared at the Theosophical Society’s London meeting the other day he was very
visible to some few persons and not at all to others.
COLONEL OLCOTT: Yes. To four
persons only.
MR. MYERS: We want now an account of
seeing your Teacher in the flesh.
COLONEL OLCOTT: One day at Bombay I
was at work in my office when a Hindu servant came and told me that a gentleman wanted to
see me in Madame Blavatsky’s bungalow --- a separate house within the same enclosure
as the main building. This was one day in 1879. I went and found alone there
my Teacher. Madame Blavatsky was then engaged in animated conversation with other
persons in the other bungalow. The interview between the Teacher and myself lasted
perhaps 10 minutes, and it related to matters of a private nature with respect to myself
and certain current events in the history of the Society. (See Appendix X.)
MR. MYERS: How do you know that your
Teacher was in actual flesh and blood on that occasion?
COLONEL OLCOTT: He put his hand upon my
head, and his hand was perfectly substantial; and he had altogether the appearance of an
ordinary living person. When he walked about the floor there was noise of his
footsteps, which is not the case with the double or phantasm.
MR. MYERS: Do you conceive that he had
travelled to Bombay in the ordinary way?
COLONEL OLCOTT: He was then stopping at a
bungalow, not far from Bombay, belonging to a person connected with this brotherhood of
the Mahatmas, and used by Mahatmas who may be passing through Bombay on business connected
with their order. He came to our place on horseback.
MR. STACK: Was he on that occasion
dressed the same as in New York?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Yes. They wear
ordinarily, when away from Thibet, a dress of white cotton --- in fact, that is the common
dress of Hindus.
MR. MYERS: Was that the only occasion on
which you have seen him in the flesh?
COLONEL OLCOTT: No; I have seen him at
other times.
MR. MYERS: Have you seen him three or
four times in the flesh?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Yes, more than that, but
not under circumstances where it would be evidence to others.
MR. MYERS: And about how many times in
the astral body?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Oh, at least 15 or 20
times.
MR. MYERS: And his appearance on all
those occasions has been quite unmistakable?
COLONEL OLCOTT: As unmistakable as the
appearance of either of you gentlemen.
MR. MYERS: Generally, when you have seen
him in the astral body you have been alone?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Not always. I have
seen him in the presence of other people. But the others, except in the instances
recorded in the pamphlet, have not seen him at the same time, and therefore my testimony
would have to stand without corroboration.
MR. STACK: Has he appeared in the flesh
to more than one person at a time?
COLONEL OLCOTT: No; save to
the servant and myself at Bombay.
MR. STACK: He never attended
a meeting of your Society, or anything in that way, in the flesh?
COLONEL OLCOTT: No.
There are reasons why that should be so, because a man who has developed himself into the
state of a Mahatma is peculiarly sensitive to what you call the mesmeric influence of all
persons with whom he comes into contact. It is a fact that every human being is
giving out an influence which is perfectly perceptible and recognisable, not only by
Mahatmas, but by many sensitive persons among you who are not able at all to define their
sensation in any way. The old lines ---
“I do not like you, Dr. Fell.
The reason why I cannot tell,
Only this I know full well.
I do not like you, Dr. Fell” ---
indicate a case in point. These attractions and repulsions we all feel, and the
whole theory of the mesmeric healing of the sick rests upon the fact that a certain
influence can be imparted from one person to another. Therefore, these men cannot
exist in the atmosphere of ordinary society, without taking special precautions, any more
than a diver can go to the bottom of the water except with his diving-dress and a
communication with the upper air.
MR. STACK: State, if you please, the
other instances of your meeting a Mahatma in the physical body.
COLONEL OLCOTT: I have seen Mahatma Koot
Hoomi in the body. While at Lahore I received from the Mahatma Koot Hoomi, through
one of his associates --- a former pupil --- an intimation that he would visit me in the
body. On the second night of my stay, I was awakened while asleep in my tent by
someone putting his hands upon me. In the instant of awaking, having a vague
impression that this might be an intruder, I seized him with both hands, at the same time
asking him in Hindustanee who he was. He replied, “Do you not remember me?”
The tone of the voice immediately recalled the Mahatma Koot Hoomi, and it then flashed
across my memory that I was to have been visited by him. In the next moment I was in
full consciousness, and let go my hold of him, slipping my hands down the whole length of
his arms to his hands, having first caught him by the shoulders. So I felt the
substance of his arms all the way down. A brief colloquy ensued, and he then, as I
lay in bed, took my left hand, and placing the fingers of his right hand into contact with
my palm, I felt growing up, as it were, some substance underneath his fingers. In
another moment he closed my hands upon this substance, said something more to me, bade me
“Good-night,” and went out of the tent. I then got up, and, going to the
light burning in the tent, found that what he had left me was a small package enveloped in
Chinese silk. On opening the package, I found within a letter in a Chinese envelope
to my address. (Colonel Olcott here exhibited the package.) The note is of a
personal character, and need not be printed; but I will allow you gentlemen to read
it. The handwriting of the communication is identical with that of the many
communications received at various times by Mr. A. P. Sinnett and many other persons.
MR. MYERS: This letter was received
without the intervention of Madame Blavatsky?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Madame Blavatsky was at
Madras at that time, a distance of perhaps 2,500 or 3,000 miles.
MR. MYERS: The light in the tent was
sufficient to allow you to distinctly recognise the features of your visitor?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Yes.
MR. MYERS: Whom you had seen in the
astral body?
COLONEL OLCOTT: Yes, and whose portrait,
phenomenally produced for Mr. Sinnett, by Madame Blavatsky at Allahabad, would give any
one an accurate idea of his personal appearance. I am prepared to affirm that his
hand was absolutely empty when he placed it in my palm, and that this packet was formed
--- or, to use a current phrased, materialised --- upon my own hand.
MR. MYERS: Of course, people would say
that conjurers would slip these things down their sleeves.
COLONEL OLCOTT: Yes, but that was not
possible in this case. The sleeves worn by Asiatic people are very large and
flowing, not tight like ours. It is important that I should mention that this
communication contains a prophecy of the death of two public characters in India, who did
actually die.
MR. MYERS: We can extract a passage from
the letter?
COLONEL OLCOTT: You may if you like.