V
I turn to the April book of Russkiy Vestnik; and begin to read chapter IX of Mr. Solovyov’s invention and – I am at a dead end!
Yes, I positively get into a blind alley, in front of the incomprehensible… I do not know how to express myself without sharp words?.. Well, in front of blatant dishonesty of that amazing man!
I ask everyone to read page 194, where he certifies that Usis Unveiled, my first great work by my sister, «is a huge sack, into which, without any parsing and system, the most diverse things and all kinds of nonsense are dropped, and nothing is unfit.» I ask not to ignore the note in which Mr. Solovyov unabashedly rebukes me, and in the most abrupt terms, because I believed his «thrown in the conversation» phrase that the book was a «phenomenon» and dared to repeat it… And now, when you read these stormy protests against my free handling of his words (and what should I say about his free handling of my words? I ask, in brackets) – I ask you to read my excuse, in the following letters of Mr. Soloviev himself.
7/19 July 1884
Paris. Rue Pergolese 48.
«Dear Vera Petrovna,
Your letter made me very, very glad, – however, I expected that you would not forget your promises… As the hasty work is over and we are now resting, there is an open space for gloomy thoughts. We need to invent a new job… The knocking, the sounds, and all the awkward. For example: an unknown voice says: «Well, there will be knocking on the window glass» – and that instant knocking begins… I almost constantly feel around me the breath and someone’s presence and to the point that it becomes disgusting… «. (That’s it, Mr. Solovev!.. But… are they not phenomena ?!). «I’ve read the letters of Koot Hoomi (Mahatma) and approved the content of these very highly. I’m reading the second part of Isis – and I am absolutely convinced that it is a phenomenon!.. «, etc.
Could I suspect that the most enthusiastic oral responses, and such written statements were just irony, jokes and lies?!.
And here’s another letter to my sister, from Paris to London.
October 22, 1884
«Dear Helena Petrovna.
On Friday, barely on my feet, I spent the whole day with Olcott. On Saturday he, with R. Gebhard, having returned from Ademar, had dinner at my place, and after dinner, I was taken ill and am still in bed. I caught a cold, and it turned out very bad.
… The second part of Isis [[1]]. I think that you should also send the first part to Paris, as this book must certainly be published here for the French. M-me Morsier is very useful for mistakes (?) And she is ready to work. It seems to me that if a duchesse [2] (the Duchess of Pomar) is left an honourary president, then if she is at least to some extent a respectable woman and respects herself, she must do something for the «society». Let her publish your Isis. Will you send Oakley to her – he will say that the Parisian «society» is in dire need of the publication of this book and hopes that the honourable duchesse will do her direct duty…
If she is such a Plyushkin[3], that she cannot, with all her wealth, make such a trifle – then what is she suitable for?!.
If she does not formally undertake to publish Isis, then I feel that I will not hold out and produce a kind of «flyushka» (scandal – in the intimate language of HPB). I hate such a nasty (?!), as that duessess!..
Maybe m-me de Morsier should write to her on behalf of the «society» about the need to publish Isis?.. Will you think it over and let me know.
Bye, see you. With all my heart.
Vs. Solovyov».
It seems that by these two letters I am removing from myself the criticism of Mr. Solovyov, and I do not need my words here anymore?
About miraculous things that occurred with the creator of the peripeteia in the style of the author of The Gorbatovs [4] during his trip to Elberfeld in the autumn of 1884, I knew in a timely manner both from his letters and from the message of that lady whom he calls by the letter «A». Since I will not have to talk about her any more, then I, incidentally, will note that, as usual, Mr. Solovyov maligned her a lot. She is, in fact, much smarter, more honest and kinder than some of his glorified close friends.
Now about «miracles in the sieve,» as Mr. Burenin put it rightly in the newspaper Novoye Vremya, in his article (Mr. Vsevolod Solovyov and the Priestess of Isis).
Knowing about these prophetic visions (April, R.V., p. 199), I confess to be always wondered at what right Mr. Solovyov had to doubt the authenticity of the appearance of Mahatma Morya to him?.. But, if we admit that he spent an hour talking with an astral spirit by the suggestion of my sister, then why he didn’t tell us that the one whose suggestion had given him a pleasant sight (also in the astral light?) of nature’s pictures, he, in fact, only met the next day? .. After all, the one must also have been a magician and sorcerer, not inferior in the power of Blavatsky.
What can I say about the story of Mr. Solovyov being visited by a «demigod, mysterious teacher«, whom suggestion to my sister he can’t admit for some reason?.. In the current version, he presents precisely that complex amalgam of truths and perjury, which the English call «the true lie, – the worst specimen of lies», that is, such kind of an artificial vinaigrette of intricacies with which the struggle is very difficult… I can only say with certainty that in Mr. Solovyov’s letter to me, which I’m referring to, there was not the slightest doubt, but everything was told, as a fact undeniable. He hesitated, somewhat later, putting the question: Was not this vision suggested to him and in part,was due to the long contemplation of the portrait of Morya? – it’s true; but, nevertheless, he confirmed that for him it was the most actual reality. And indeed! Visual impressions are known to be only a faithful repetition of the seen; and after all, the Mahatma appeared to him standing, then he sat down on a chair and was talking to him for an hour about various intimate affairs… Is it a «repetition» of the seen?..
Here are some excerpts from Mr. Solovyov’s letter dated October 30th / 18th 1884, from Paris.
«… I am sending you a copy of the story of my adventures in Elberfeld, which I have sent as a report to the London Psychical Society. From the story you will learn everything that interests you, and make sure of my courage in front of any public opinion. But, however, my courage has its limits, and I definitely do not want my adventures to get into Russian newspapers… «. (What kind of courage is there? one can exclaim, but judging by the events that follow, one should rather notice: what a far-sighted precaution!). «I wrote to Pribytkov about that,» Mr. Solovyov continues. «Everything will come to its own end and everything, one way or another, will be explained – for there is nothing secret that would not have become obvious …», etc.
Verily!.. And what a great happiness for honest people, that this gospel word is sometimes justified on the Earth…
Here are one or two fragments, in support of my words about the incomplete identity of the real testimony of Mr. Solovyov in the first story published in the journal of the London Psychical Society (I have a copy of it). For example, on page 202 of Russkiy Vestnik , April it is said:
«I lit a candle, and I imagined that my clock showed two hours …».
And in the previous description of the event it is simply stated:
«I saw that my clock showed two hours …».
Further, on the same page of Russkiy Vestnik:
«His head (the Mahatma’s) made a movement (?), He smiled and said, again in the silent thought language of dreams…» and so on.
And in the story, of the time of the incident, it is said in the affirmative – that hardly Mr. Solovyov thought he was going crazy, he immediately saw, in the same place, «a magnificent man in white robes».
«He nod his head and, smiling, told me,» says the visionary, «be sure that I am not a hallucination», etc., without any indication of the language in which the Mahatma spoke.
Do you agree that these stories produce completely different impression?
In the story written by the hero of the Elberfeld miracles at the spot, or immediately upon his return to Paris, there are absolutely no expressions like: «it seemed to me, it was only my imagination» – and, undoubtedly, there is no hint at anything similar to that spiteful, completely fictional satire, in which he now tries to portray Blavatsky, Olcott and all those around them in Elberfeld.
It would be impossible for him, who believed then (or falsely assured that he believed – I do not know) in all phenomena. He has devised now a vaudeville scene in which my sister sends upstairs for Olcott; she asks him: «on which side» he felt the approach of the «teacher»; she orders him to empty his pocket, where the fabricated note of Morya was found (he forgot that he then called him not Morya, but Koot Hoomi); but – at that time – there was not a word of Olcott’s «pocket»! He himself, Mr. Solovyov, boasted that he had directly received a note from the «teacher».
In the proof, I cite passages relating to the case, from his letter to me, on November 21/9, 1884, from Paris:
«… Now to another thing. In vain are your reproaches! – my soul is open to you (why did Mr. Solovyov need to fool me with his devotion? Me, who never deceived him!) And I trust you completely. I’ll start with the smaller thing. You’d like to know what intimate things Morya told me. But, who told? Was it Morya? I strongly doubt it… I hope you do not doubt in my writing, – I described everything as it was.» (No, I did not doubt then the truthfulness of Mr. Solovyov, but I was very surprised, because he first expressed to me the doubt about the authenticity of the Mahatma appearance). «I told Professor Myers about it and I had to agree to send my message to the London Psychical Society,» he continues.
Further lengthy explanations about the possibility of hypnotic suggestion, and then a new message illustrating once again the miraculous powers and properties of my sister. It is the incident with Mr. Solovyov, which he now replaced with – «a note found in Olcott’s pocket», between a button and a toothpick. Here it is in his first edition, in the same letter of Mr. Solovyov:
«… But here is a fact. In the same place (in Elberfeld) I received, to the great envy of the Theosophists, Koot Hoomi’s own handwritten note and even in Russian. I wasn’t at all surprised when finding it in the notebook I was holding in my hand, I had a premonition and almost knew it. But it struck me that that note run clearly and definitely about what we were exactly talking about a minute ago!!! There was an answer to my words – and during that minute I was standing alone, no one came up to me. If it can be assumed that someone had put a note in the notebook beforehand, then that someone took possession of my thoughts and made me say those words, the direct answer to which was in a note… This amazing phenomenon I distinctly observed several times happened to myself and to others. What a power ?! And next to this power, what an impotence sometimes!.. ».
The power is undoubtedly great, but… where is the «button, toothpick» and other objects «pulled out of Olcott’s pocket«, Mr. Solovyov?.. You, this time, are right: with such a spiritual power of her gifts the “weekness” of HP Blavatsky was exactly noticed. How couldn’t she, unhappy, but know that not in front of every compatriot, even a named friend, the pearls of her psychic powers might be lavished? How could not she foresee that that friend, when death would close her mouth, would find it possible, instead of the «fact«, which aroused to him the «envy of all theosophists» to tell about the boon scene that he had painted on page 205 of his unceremonious fiction? !.
Here is another funny bévue[5] by Solovyov. Oh! Forgetfulness is a big defect! On page 215 the last words of the letter are given, in which H [elena] P [etrovna] asks him to find out the address of the m-me Tcheng, chromophotographist, formerly living in rue Byron. On the next page, he pompously declares that, «of course, he did not fulfill» any orders of «madame», and «did not look for some kind of chromophotographist, who shouldn’t have seen or known me – all this would be, at least ridiculous! »
Was it ridiculous, and how could the sister ask him to remain anonymous to Ms. Cheng, as he simply and directly wrote to her that both himself and m-me Morsie, accepted her and talked with her about HP Blavatsky, – I do not know! But here is his letter about this meeting in the entire inviolability of the lines relating to it:
October 1, 1884
Paris.
«Dear Helena Petrovna, a chromophotographist with a Chinese name is living right there, she is currently in Paris and is engaged not only in the production of portraits, but also in the production of some articles in the local newspapers Le Gaulois and Le Gil Blas.
Mme de Morsier says that I hypnotized her today, and the hypnotization consists in the fact that she has fallen in love with you terribly (!?!) and felt, holding my hands – terribly ticklish – and smelling (?) your last letter with the addition of Koot Hoomi – that you are completely sincere et bonne, donne comme du pain[6] ! «.
That’s how it really happened with the chromophotogdaphist!.. Good Mr. Solovyov tried to fulfill my sister’s assignment better than she wanted, and now it occurred to him that he had not “of course” fulfilled it !!
Here is the end of the letter of October 1 and a few interesting letters, which fully confirm the opinion of Mr. Burenin (Novoye Vremya No. 6038), that the cruel accuser of my sister himself believed in the «existence and great powers» of muslin sage-demigods [7]:
«I must certainly know when, with what train Mohini will arrive. I hope he visits me, then m-me de Morsier (this is her desire) would appear with Bessak. Bessak is now ending a very serious, extensive and sympathetic article on Theosophy; but he runs into some mistakes that Mohini can show him.
Yesterday I sent you two letters. With this, I’m sending a reply from Keightley …
I’m waiting for you, although I still do not believe in such luck.
Yours, with all my heart.
Vs. Solovyov.
To me:
August 28 / September 9, 1884
«Dear Vera Petrovna, I have just received your letter and I am in a hurry to talk with you… I returned from Elberfeld on these days, where I spent a week at the bedside of poor Helena Petrovna. I must tell you that from the point of view of European medicine, she is very, very ill; but more than ever, along with those around her, believes in the power of her Mahatmas and knows that her illness is not to death. In any case, she will have to spend a long time in Elberfeld. Doctors stated: obesity of the heart, sugar sickness and the strongest rheumatism, from which her left hand swelled up, and the heart is not far away. She suffers greatly, but is amazingly cheerful in spirit!.. Wonders are beyond count! And, in the end, perhaps, she will recover, which I want with all my might, for I love her (sic)! «.
Please note that this letter was written under the fresh impression after return from Elberfeld, where HPB [lavatskaya] was recognized by Vs. S. Solovyov a criminal without appeal. Here are a few more lines written at a time when he already knew – if you believe his confessions in «The Modern Priestess of Isis «- that the Mahatmas are malicious invention of Blavatsky and in fact they do not exist at all.
October 30, 1884
«Tomorrow Helena Petrovna is leaving for Liverpool, Egypt, and from there to India. How she is still alive, how she can go, and go so far and at such a time of the year is a miracle for me! Or rather, one of the proofs (sic) of the Mahatmas’ existence!.. ».
The following passage from a letter dated November 21/9, 1884, which will be further reproduced in full, characterizes Mr. Solovyov in a manner that shows how worthy he is to be believed:
«… And when her existence [21] ends, which – I must think so, is now supported only artificially, by some magical power – I will always mourn the loss of this unfortunate and remarkable woman!..»
And now – he’s mourning for her!..
He is mourning the loss of her, applying to her all the abusive and humiliating epithets that can be invented by human malice and deceit, counting on the credulity of the people and on his complete impunity!
How can I not recall here the words of HP Blavatsky in one of her letters to me:
«If Solovyov were a suspecting, but an honest enemy – he would not lie!..».
And further:
«I tell you, Vera, one thing, I am prophesying and predicting: you will bitterly regret the trust and friendship with Solovyov – when it’s too late! I loved him too, like a brother!..»
Oh! how many times later I remembered this prophecy and how bitterly I am thinking now about it!.. When now I see what the hand of this «unfortunate» man is rising at (I will also call him unfortunate, as he is always calling my sister!). One can read with amazement that next to cursing and slander, he dares to cite such scenes as a description of her sufferings and her requests addressed to him as «to a sincere friend» – as to the Russian one – not to leave her alone, on the deathbed:
“»Have pity on me,» Mr. Solovyov quotes on pages 207-208 and continues, – her voice broke off, tears sprang from her eyes.
«After all, I’m alone! They are all strangers, strangers!.. Only you are a friend, Russian!.. My dear friend, do not leave me, the old woman, at such a time «…”.
Oh my God! Does Mr. Solovyov not understand that he is beating himself?!.. After describing such scenes, his cynical confessions in the immediately accepted intention to deceive, raid on this suffering (by his conviction, dying) compatriot who appealed to him as to Russian – as a friend, sound even more terrible, even more offensive to him?
However, what should I say on my behalf?.. Letters from him, letters and letters!.. They must act more convincingly than any exclamations. In them, Mr. Solovyov himself will prove to Russian readers that of all people who have the right to resent others’ deceptions, he has surely lost it!
VI
By this kind of sweet letters he lulled us, not only my sister, but me too, who certainly was not guilty of deceits, either before him or anyone!.. Please do not forget that they all belong to the time about which he, with such violent indignation of the righteous, recounts in chapter XII of his present invention.
September 13/25, 1884
Paris.
“Dear name day ladies!!! I have the honour to congratulate you (me and my daughters) on your angel’s day and first of all to wish you… (friendly, comic wishes and thanks for the photos sent to him). I received an order from H. P. with postscript *** and Ts ** (visitors who came to me sister from Odessa, after the departure of Mr. Solovyov) again to come to Elberfeld. But I cannot do this, for I am terribly busy; carried away by theosophy, or rather, a representative of it; God knows what I made up in his new novel and now I’m busy with corrections, and the editor from Petersburg is urging: quick ! quick !
Helena Petrovna is angry and has a magic effect on me. I feel the effect, but I’m getting stronger, like a real «chela» (disciple of the Mahatma), who must be «higher than desires» …
Forgive me for the awful handwriting – the consequence of an incredible pen – and for the ridiculous (would not it be more correct to say: hypocritical?) letter – a consequence of a mental breakdown, I hope a temporary one …
How I would like to spend the 17th of September with you. I used to have three sisters who had their angel’s day on this date… and now you!
Yours, from all my heart,
Vs. Solovyov.”
Let me explain here that in all his letters Mr. Solovyov was constantly making my daughters declaration of «brotherly friendship» and he assured them to be «his sisters in spirit.» It goes without saying that he assured me of his friendship and filial devotion. We, without knowing either his family or his wife, very much regretted that family quarrels forced the poor man to renounce his own sisters! Here is, simultaneously, his letter from the same time, to the «terrible thief of souls«, which he really decided to destroy:
September 26, 1884
“Dear Helena Petrovna, not possessing magical abilities, I may not know what is happening to you, if I do not receive any news and if my letters remain unanswered. But why don’t you know and see what’s going on here?!. As you know, Duchess Pomar refused the presidency [[8]]. She is deeply offended by the colonel. The defender of the American Negroes (Olcott) really turned out to be inexcusable in his explanations with the European grande dame [[9]]. She hisses like a cat, which tail was stepped upon, and, like a hissing cat, she is dangerous! She shows a letter to her from that Odessa lady, Mrs. G., or, in a word, the one with a hunchbacked son. The lady, in turn, was enraged at the reception made to her in Elberfeld, mainly from the fact that Mohini (?!) was being hidden from her. Of course, everything falls on you and both those ladies (?!) are playing horrible mean tricks. The local society is in a state of decay and extreme mistrust.
Mrs. G. promises to open people’s eyes in Russia [[10]]… To talk about various stories, rumors and gossips is disgusting and not worthy [[11]]. Dramar and Bessak could be useful, only now they are losing heart. M-me Morsier is ranting and raving, and only controlling herself due to the love for Koot Hoomi and partly by me. What I can do, I do! I am indifferent to the theosophical society, the understanding of which is eluding me, thanks to your distrust of me (?!); but I treasure your reputation. If I cannot do a lot for her here, I could do in Russia. Therefore, I needed a date with Ts. **. I could, with his help, clip Mrs. G.’s wings, and could strengthen him, for after staying in Elberfeld, everyone needs to be strengthened, since there are a lot of mistakes in Elberfeld that do not come from you, but which you, for some reason, do not see. I do not care about others, but I need you to be uninvolved. I cannot paint further. If you wish, it will be clear to you (?). Respond, though.
Yours, from all my heart.
Solovyov.”
It was, without a doubt, clear! Unfortunately, at my own request, most of my sister’s Russian correspondence after her death was burned. Only what she herself gave me and that they sent me later from Adyar survived. If it were not for this inexcusable recklessness, it would probably be possible for me now to explain to the readers what the cautious Mr. Solovyov himself found inconvenient to «paint«…
Here are the letters pages 215 – 217th.
Monday, (without date).
«Dear Helena Petrovna, now I received your letter. Believe it or not, but neither it nor even the postscript of Koot Hoomi surprised me at all. I will make a sensation through m-me Morsier.
Mohini, if he is well and firmly (?) directed is very useful!.. What a meanness, that I do not speak English!
I need to see you positively and I can’t say, how happy I would be if you came to me!.. It’s not only me, but we would be happy. And I hope it would be convenient for you. It’s a small detour from Elberfeld to London via Paris…
Perhaps we would have agreed on something in Russian [[12]]… And I would take you to London …
I do not know how to beg you not to hurry to resign. Let’s have a talk before, and if this is unavoidable, then in your presence I will write everything and everywhere it is necessary.
What can be written in letters ?! Looking forward to hearing from you.
Yours, from all my heart,
Vs. Soloviev.
P.S. Do not worry, in the name of all that is holy! «.
Is this not a speech of a sincere friendship?.. It’s just that you can make a mistake and think that Mr. Solovyov did not then bluff Blavatskaya, but now he is bluffing Russian Orthodox Christians.
But here’s what is truly unclear: why did he need to persuade my sister not to resign? What was he so fervently wishing to talk with her before and, perhaps, «to agree on something»?… Will he explain the details to those who are interested in his «revelations»?.. But is not this a strange contradiction? He himself states in public that he would have left her alone if she had listened to him – she would have indulged only in literary activities given up to engage in malicious theosophy, or suddenly, when she wants to leave the representation of a «gloomy«, «destructive for the human souls society«, he himself – «does not know how to beg her not to resign«… What does this mean? What are such contradictions for?!
But that’s just the point, to be able to keep silent in time. This Talleyrand rule is distinguished by clever people who can speak well, and even better – be silent!
In this fraudulent time, Mr. Solovyov tried not to compromise himself, adding in writing that was discussed only verbally at «secret audiences» between him and my sister. He replaced frank speech with hints, which only she could understand.
All these phrases: «I can’t write a lot.. If you wish it will be clear for you!.. Your health is dear to me as much as for yourself… Come and maybe we will agree!.. What can be written in letters?” Were all these reminders and hints written for nothing if they had no deep meaning?.. Had not he cherish, much more significant goals than the purposeless exposure of Blavatsky; had not he made a mistake in his calculations he would probably not have been so indecently generous in the outpouring of his revenge and bile on her grave. And not without grounds I called purposeless all his humiliating comedies, fraud and slander, he knew perfectly well and still knows now that he can not shake her work or undermine her fame in foreign countries, but in Russia theosophy has nothing to do …
If Mr. Solovyov had definately stood up for truth alone and the salvation of innocent souls from the evil tenets of the «terrible deceiver,» then, having finished this mission, having fully understood Blavatsky’s criminality, he would not have waited for seven years, and immediately would have accused her. And, first of all, he would have abandoned the destructive society and, having shaken off the dust from his feet, would not have continued his role as a betraying friend for more than a year, after Blavatskaya’s return from India, until the beginning of 1886. Apparently, Mr. Solovyov was waiting for something from my sister that caused him to play up to her for so long, and to leave the Society only in February 1886 and not write about her while she was alive.
After all, he can fool the ignorant people with fables about the fact that while I was silent about theosophy, – he said nothing. It is not true! I kept writing and publishing all these years, from time to time, just when I felt like it, and he knew it perfectly well, but he did not raise his voice, because he was afraid of my sister. He had to wait for her death to speak freely…
Fortunately, he was yet somewhat mistaken in thinking that time had destroyed all the evidence: there are still enough of them, and I firmly believe that they will shake his arrogant considerations of the strength of his opinions and authority.
Evidently, artfully, con amore [[13]], as a true artist, Mr. Solovyov was in his Iscariot’s correspondence with HP Blavatskaya, if she, overloaded with work, literary writings and the organization of the branch of the Theosophical Society in London – a real, serious society, but not a parody of it, what was in Paris – wrote to me, by the way, having returned home from Elberfeld, in September 1884
«… What should I do with the pitiful letters of admirers who are in love with me?….. I have not to answer half of them at all, but, after all, there are many such ones, whom I myself love and feel sorry about – like our poor Vsevolod Sergeevich Solovyov! How long have I been in London, and I’ve already received two pitiful letters. He asks only to love and not to forget… He says that he did not like anybody from strangers like me, the old one. Thanks to him!..».
That’s how the future fraudulent judge got round the poor fraudster… Well, did he do it only to her?.. Even though he needed her, he even had his own interests in her, for which, perhaps, his humiliatingly false mess was worth dragging out. But why did he fool me and my whole family?.. Positively for the love of art – every week he wrote sweet letters, then to me, then to my daughters, declaring his friendship [[14]]. And among these assurances in the unconscious and boundless feelings of love and devotion personally for us, he had never forgotten to squeeze such reassuring lines about Helena:
“I do not play double games with anyone, and the following phrases in the letters I receive can prove that:» You’re writing that you do not care about the Society; but I gave up my life, health, soul, honor, future for it… If you, my sincere friend, directly suspect me that when I fail in producing a phenomenon, then I counterfeit it, what will the enemies say? «”.
«But she knows that I really love her and that I’m her friend!» – immediately, after quotations from my sister’s letters to him, Mr. Solovyov continues fooling me, ending the very letter (from November 9) with the notorious phrase that, when this wonderful woman dies, «I will forever mourn her«. «Let’s understand each other,» he asks me, «that is, to forgive not in words, but in deeds …». And so on.
Could I not calm down by such Christian rules of Vsev. Serg. In the course of more than a year of my life, I, a gray-haired woman, schooled by experience, seemingly having some knowledge of human treachery, believed him, of course, and loved him, almost like a son!.. I know that such confession will not raise my mental abilities in the eyes of people, but I consider myself obliged to bear the shame of that public confession, for the sake of explaining the subsequent events. When unfavourable rumors reached me, I hastened to blame everyone, except the real culprit, calmed down with his pious words.
«Dear Vera Petrovna! – he wrote to me then. – I can’t be afraid for our relations with you, no matter what gossip threatens them, – but what melancholia this all causes!.. Everything is very clear to me, and now I can say that H [elena] P [etrovna] gave all her soul up for the Society. For the «Society» and its work. They are afraid of your influence on me to the detriment of the «Society» (!), And now I’m really needed by the «Society»… My soul is open to you «, etc., etc.
Really, «a cock-and-bull story«, which I had an unexplained subsequently for me stupidity to believe in. That’s where there was true «suggestion» and dense blinding. Later, I often recalled Mr. Solovyov’s assurances that he was allegedly emanating a certain «fluide» which acted magnetically… I wondered if he had used it to his advantage to stir up our (my, my sister’s and my children’s) distrust and anger, unfairly, against the close people?
VII
It is clear that I cannot and will not respond to the fully reproduced report of the London Psychical Society. Yes, if this were conceivable in the place and volume that my answer should have in defense of my sister, I would not have undertaken it, for the following reasons:
- I) Refutations to this report (biased even in the opinion of non-theosophical newspapers) were written at the same time, on the spot, both in England and in America, by many people who were far more competent than me, who inherited the matter, who carried out an investigation of any invistigation of that Hodgson «bypassed by missionaries» and «fooled by the natives». This is how people, who know the details of the case better than Mr. Solovyov, call him. The people (the fanatical natives), they say, have never approved the exposure of the existence and activities of their Gurus (Mahatmas), considered holy by them, and were very happy to refute their reality in the opinion of Europeans. But we do not care!.. I will name the most important of the articles written in the refutation of the Report of the Psychical Society, and then let those wishing to know their essence – themselves will turn to them. 1) Report of the result of an investigation into the charges against m-me Blavatsky, brought by the Missionaries of the Scottish Free Church, at Madras. Reexamined by. a committee appointed for that purpose by the General Council of the Theos. Society. Madras. 1885. 2) Reply to an examination, by I.D.B. Gribble, M.C.S., into the Blavatsky correspondence. By H. R. Morgan. Major General, Madras Army. 3) Official Report of the Ninth Session of the General Convention. Madras. 4) The «Occult World phenomena» and the Society for Psychical Research, by Sinnett. With a Protest by M-me Blavatsky. London. 1886. 5) (Appendix to the newspaper The Times) The Great Mares Nest of the Psychical Research Society. By Mrs. Annie Besant». 6) A detailed study by Dr. Hartmann (which I read with great interest, but I can not name, because I do not have it at the moment). If not mistaken, its title: Report of Observations of a Private Visitor. And so on-without end, or ending with a protest sent from London, about three years ago, to our newspapers; a protest signed by a significant number of people, which, however, did not find a place in the Russian press, as «the message not interesting for the Russian public»… I keep it in my possession.
I continue enumerating reasons why I will not answer the testimonies of the «Report» of the Psychical Society in detail.
- II) Because my personal answer to the author of the The Modern Priestess of Isis – thanks to his fantasy on HP Blavatsky’s charges – is already threatening to drag out more than I would have wished; and his arguments for me are much more important than the arguments of Hodgson, Myers and Co., –up to the Coulombs and the Jesuits inclusive.
III) It is also because, for me, as for all those who know the teaching and scientific works of HPB, the truth or falsity of the phenomena themselves is nothing in the theosophical movement! It is instituted and founded firmly not on the «bells» or even on the «air messages» of its «patrons, mysterious teachers» – but on real books of my sister and her many scientific associates and, in part, on the real charity institutions named after HPBlavatsky, as , for example, the Shelter for female workers in East End,, a beggarly quarter of London. Unfortunately, Mr. Solovyov has no idea about those books, or about those charitable institutions of the Theosophical Society (I make such conclusions because he would probably have mentioned them also, describing the life and significance of the founder of the Society, if he knew anything about them).
- IV) Another reason is that I suppose that, no matter how the psychologists and Mr. Solovyov described their charges, it is unlikely that people who are reasonable more or less well will believe that HPB was such an idiot that in her absence from Adyar to order traps, double cabinets and all sorts of adaptations for tricks in her rooms. If she did not have the wits at all to think that such machinations must be carried out before her eyes, with all sorts of concealment, then at least she would not allow outside visitors to enter her rooms without her permission. But the facts are as follows: the Scottish missionaries, having bribed the Coulombs, sent their agents to inspect their work in Adyar… The Jesuit Patterson himself admitted (this was stated in many articles that Mr. Solovyov should read together with the «Report» by Hodgson which he learnt by heart) that at different times he paid the Coulombs for their service, especially for the letters allegedly written by Blavatsky. I am amazed at the protests of Mr. Solovyov against forgery in the letters of my sister! He has not seen the letters… Does not he really know that such things happened in the world?.. Which crimes didn’t fanaticism generate, especially when vindictive people began acting, like the Jesuit Patterson, «into the glory of God»!
And, finally, my fifth and final reason for not paying attention to the intrigues of the Coulombs, Patterson, Hodgson and Co. is an acquaintance with the protests against them, protests that, in most cases, were initiated through the first acquaintance with their testimony. Every impartial person always immediately rebelled against such slanders, – as Mr. Solovyov himself turned against them, then still looking at things sensibly and fairly.
This is what he himself wrote to my sister in a timely manner.
Friday, June 12, 1885
Paris. Rue Balzac 4.
«Dear Helena Petrovna!.. Those two weeks here were not in vain. Sinnett and Crookes came here. I met them, but that’s not the point, but the fact is that everything is arranged and prepared so that, at least here – that is, in the local press – to disgrace that foul of Coulomb and all the donkeys – though they would belong to some learned Society – who could at least give a moment’s meaning to her infamous pamphlet. This brochure here aroused general indignation, and I did not even have to defend you to anyone – because after this nasty intrigue, sympathy for you only increased (!?!)… Ah! If we could see each other!
Sincerely yours, devoted and loving
Vs. Soloviev ».
This is what Mr. Solovyov thought and said before; and since my main goal in this article is not at all to justify my sister from the attacks of her other enemies – in front of whom she has long been justified – but to prove to the Russian public that one cannot believe the accusations and stories of Solovyov himself then I won’t talk about it any more. I also know that the evidence in tricks – which she herself called psychological tricks – will not undermine her authority and will not harm her or her cause in the the opinion of the competent people, who do not believe all her merits to be several manifestations of power — in Europe, still unknown – learned by her when living in India. Eventually, however, they will be appreciated at its true value, as Radd-Bai was appreciated by the founder of Russkiy Vestnik so highly that he found time to be with her in personal correspondence in spite of being very busy.
Here are a few lines from one letter to my sister written by Mikh[ail] Nikif[orovich] Katkov, directly indicating his attitude to her and her cause.
27 Apr. 1884
Moscow.
«Dear Madam, Helena Petrovna!
I use the first idle minute to answer you. You cannot doubt my desire to ensure your cooperation in my publications.
I appreciate both your talent and your search in esoteric realms and do not belong to the «people of science» who believe wisdom in not wanting to know what they do not know.
I do not retreat before the reports of a purely fantastic property and if I’m at a loss, then only where the explanation begins to become some tendency, propaganda… I consider it a duty to say that at the heart of all religions I recognize the transcendental reality and do not consider it a fable; but I remain convinced that there is only one religion in which all transcendental religions find their true place and true illumination. And I would have to talk about this a lot, but I must hurry with my answer, which, I’m afraid, is too late, as it is… I’m amazed and happy about how strong and alive the Russian origin is in you – so long ago having left home – which is so good affects your language and your Russian sympathies. Accept the assurance of my respect and sincere devotion.
- Katkov».
Pointing at the beginning of this chapter to some sources where those who want to know how and by what means the supporters of HP Blavatsky refute the arguments of the Psychical Society, can read their testimonies, I, with the permission of Mr. Solovyov, will leave all that case long ago abolished by competent people, and resurrected from the dead only by him, I will take up raising objections to some of his own notes and remarks.
Although he accuses me of incorrect translations (why do such ugly and unsubstantiated accusations so easily come from the pen of the translator of Hodgson’s «Report»? All that remains for me is to be surprised!), and on page 229, Apr. «RV» he accuses me in the malicious unfounded testimony, but I boldly direct the last charge to him. Moreover, I will add to it that he raised his unfounded accusation against me in the direct hope that readers will not compare his instructions with my article in Russk. Vest… I ask those wishing to know the truth to make a comparison. They will see then what, undoubtedly, Mr. Solovyov must have seen- namely, that I everywhere make references and I do not say by arbitrary conclusions, not even by the letters of my sister, but by the testimony of the witnesses who were there and among them the Cooper-Oakley. I emphasize this name not in vain, but because I still have to talk with my merciless «accuser» because of it.
On page 226 I find a witty message, in which Mr. Solovyov, with his usual frivolity, reproaches my sister for lying. She boasted to him that one theosophist offered her 40,000 rubles, the other two villages, the third offered to pay all the costs in the case against the Coulombs and the Jesuits; and she in the press says that she «does not have any money to hold the trial» …
Indeed! It’s an amazing thing: good people give money, and a stupid woman does not take it – preferring to suffer personally, than to use the generosity of friends and ruin them for her cause. And if Mr. Solovyov knew, as I know it, how many times Helena [Petrovna] did such a foolish thing as refusing very large sums, when those who gave them demanded that she would take money for herself, and not use it for the Society, he would be even more surprised… If, after the first outbursts of despair, she did not understand that the slander and betrayal that tormented her would not at all tell on the Society, and theosophical movement would not be stopped – oh! then she would no doubt have taken advantage of the generous offerings of her devoted people. But she did not want to spend other people’s money not to satisfy anybody’s self-esteem, or cause personal revenge and personal justification.
Can there really be people who do not understand or even condemn this?
(Pages 227). Regarding Mr. Solovyov’s surprise, despite his efforts to translate my sister’s letters into French (letters, it should be noted, written only for him, in moments of extreme distress, anxiety, in times full of despair); despite the zealous distribution, for the edification of the French, of the incriminating report and all sorts of truths and untruths, the Theosophical Society and her cause did not only die with her, but they are being expanded, and I will note again that no efforts of the enemies can change the essence and meaning of the works of HPB. He draws his readers’ attention to the fact that her letters to him are «especially interesting for comparing them with actual facts.» I also hope that the comparison of his letters with what he is now saying will prove to be interesting.
On page 228, an extremely naive reference can be found. This is what Mr. Solovyov observes in her:
«When I asked Blavatsky, back in Paris,» to whom she left her house in Adyar, «she replied:» Oh, I am quite at peace, there I have my old friend and assistant, m-me Coulomb, and her husband — people, entirely devoted to my cause «…». «Then, suddenly,» he continues, «to my amazement, in the camp of the defenders of Blavatsky these friends and helpers turned into» bribed servants «…».
Only think! what has Mr. Solovev found to be surprised at!?.. Are there few examples, when old, devoted servants are considered as friends? It’s also not surprising that sometimes servants are hypocritical and can betray, becoming enemies from friends …My sister had known the Coulombs for many years. Unaware that they had fled from Egypt and France, where they were being searched by the police, she met them in Bombay in total poverty, saved them from starvation; sheltered them, employed the wife as a housekeeper, and then, elevating her to a position like a secretary, since she could speak English and French. Her husband, with the move to Adyar, also after having been first employed as a delivery man and a carpenter, was given a position as an officer in charge of the library. At first, my sister did not call them servants out of delicacy; but after spreading disgusting gossips, making all sorts of tricks, luring money out of everyone, they had to be put in their place; and in the absence of the owners, they caused so much trouble and many problems for everyone in Adyar that Mr. George Lane-Fox left as a head of the department wrote to Colonel Olcott in Europe that he had to fire them and he told them that they should look for another job. It was then, when both the husband and the wife realized that it would be more advantageous for them to serve the Jesuits, who promised a good payment for incriminating Blavatsky in charlatanry. After asking Lane-Fox to give him time for finding employment, the husband began making his carpenter tricks in Helena Petrovna’s bedroom, about which I tell (not from myself, but from the words of Mrs. Cooper-Oakley) on page 583 in my article about my sister in Russkoe Obozrenie; and the wife tried to sell Patterson her in advance trumped-up letters, which she had previously decided to use, but could not make up her mind [29]… What is Mr. Solovyov marveling at? At the mistake of my sister, who considered the Coulombs to be her devoted friends?.. But, my God, he must know that my poor sister was repeatedly mistaken in people and more than once she gave herself to the power of «unfaithful friends» through her excessive frankness. To be surprised at their treachery is also strange, on his part!.. Why is not he surprised at himself?.. He, after all, is no match for those plain people – a famous writer – but he turned from a devoted friend – into an ardent enemy!..
Of course, explaining that change, he refers to more or less prudent forces majeures [30]: excusing his hypocrisy through «jealousy for Russian Orthodoxy» and the desire to save the fatherland from an unknown danger; but, in fact, the traitors, the Coulombs acted for the same «noble sentiments.» The Jesuits, perhaps, directed their hearts and minds to «exposing the thief of souls,» so they suddenly realized and began to work «ad majorem Dei gloriam [31]»… Nothing new!
Now about the expertise of handwriting. If Mr. Solovyov refers to the testimony given in the Report of the Psychical Society, the calligraphers of London who determined the similarity between the handwritings of Blavatsky and the Mahatmas, I can only ask him: why doesn’t he immediately give the opinion of the Berlin experts? After all, the opinion of the calligrapher at the Emperor of Germany court, and at the Berlin courts, Ernst Schuetz, who was produced, several letters from both «teachers» and HPB by the whole commission, entered into all exculpatory articles of her defenders. And any conscientious narrator of events related about that intricate case should mention how determinedly the Berlin expert stated that in their handwriting «there was not a single similar feature«… Similarly, the opinions of official experts in Madras were divided, which was witnessed in many non-theosophical organs of India and England. Not willing to offense all the calligraphers who served Hodgson and Solovyov, I will allow myself to ask an «unfounded» question: when could my sister, overload with writing, with her enormous works, publication of her magazines, fictional articles in foreign journals (the latter only fed her), the formation of the Society, weekly lectures, etc., countless lessons, find time to fabricate letters? And, not single ones, but series of them, of which two volumes are now compiled [32]. Moreover, in all sorts of Indian new and ancient languages!.. This is the first question that puzzles me, but the second one: who is writing them now?.. They continue to pour in exactly the same strange, «Tibetan» [33] – as the Theosophists call them, – envelopes and in the same handwriting. I have official documents for this from the Headquarters in London.
Let readers not think that I am writing this, wanting to prove the existence of the Mahatmas or the authenticity of their transcendental correspondence – by no means! I have not received their letters, nor seen them, and do not particularly care for them, – although in the name of truth I will say that I cannot deny their existence… This is another, third-party question. Now I would just like to prove that it is unfair to make of my sister, who served the Society with many real merits, some goat-buckler responsible for all its confusion and lawlessness-if such can be conceded.
Mr. Solovyov has another remarkable note, on page 235.
In order to explain – the possibility of its origin, I must say here that HP Blavatsky, among many of her good qualities, had one thing, brought to the extreme, and therefore turned into a flaw, because of which she had to suffer first: she hated hypocrisy. With friends and enemies she was always sincere; expressed her feelings directly and often so wittyly stigmatized people who aroused her indignation or contempt that the nickname remained with them forever. Thus, she from early youth had a lot of enemies; especially in Tiflis, where she wrote a lively and faithful, but very biting satire on the contemporary society and it was passed from hand to hand. From this we can conclude how many ill-wishers there were there and how many impossible fables were told about her, in retaliation!
Some of them were very evil, others – ridiculous and very many cynical up to disgrace and untruth. For example, I will point out the fabrications used by the maid of honour Smirnova (I do not know why Mr. Solovyov calls her «old Sm» when she’s still not old). Some liars, probably those inhabitents of Tiflis offended by Helena Petrovna’s wit, told her fables, which she, in the innocence of the soul, spread for truth. Because of those absurdities, Blavatsky had to resort to the testimony of her old acquaintance, Prince Dondukov-Korsakov, who was Commander-in-chief at the Caucasus, and who sent her an official certificate that she was not involved in any thefts or reprehensible cases, she had nothing to do with police and from Tiflis was not evicted, but left it at will. It is the very «testimony» that provokes the ridicule of Mr. Solovyov: as if it is worse than any disgrace!.. I agree, but what to do with other, indiscriminate accusations that do not disdain any weapon?..
By his remark (on page 235) about «absolutely impossible story in the press,» which he, however, found the opportunity to squeeze into one of the best Russian journals! – Mr. Solovyov reminded me of the remarkably correct definition of him by my sister, in one of the later letters:
«What have I done to that man? She exclaims. – Wishing to harm me, he is turning into the hyena-grave robber. He is digging out not only rubbish and garbage pits, but old, decayed graves and is beating me with bones of skeletons… «.
Well, sewage of garbage pits is not a weapon of an honest enemy who respects himself and the human opinion about himself!..
Who did not have any sins in the past? Where is the chosen lucky one who, after looking back, will not see stumbling blocks in the past behind him, which with evil intents, can be built up in the mountains of impurity?.. But is it the business of respectable people to engage in this unseemly work?.. And who will not remember, when loading stones on other people’s heads, and even more on other people’s graves, the Saviour’s words: » He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first»?.. Oh! how heavy, there must be this stone!..
But Mr. Solovyov ends his testimony in the April book of the Russkiy Vestnik with such a charm that it is impossible not to point out in all its inviolability.
He finds «the most curious» that I, accusing Hodgson of prejudiced bad faith, of the unilateral isolation in which he carried out the investigation in Adyar, content with the testimony of some prosecutors, cite the unseemly fact that he refused to show HP and friends, her letters, – fabricated by the housekeeper Coulomb.
I definitely condemned and still condemn it, completely agreeing with the opinion of the honest people pointing out this abuse, as the best proof that Hodgson was afraid of comparisons. But, I confess, that the original explanation by which Mr. Solovyov justifies that incident, finding it possible even to praise Hodgson’s wisdom in it could never occurred to me…
«As if it is not entirely clear (?!),» he declares, «that if such documents, which included the death sentence of «madame» (?!?) and her closest collaborators, were shown to those condemned to death (italics added), then they would not stand on ceremony: they would simply (?!) wrest documents from the hands of the investigator and destroy them… «.
Oh-oh-oh!.. By what examples does Mr. Solovyov judge?!.
True, he very emphatically calls the Theosophists all kinds of shameful nicknames, but still!.. Or does he seriously think that such a thing is possible?!. Is it possible and even «simple«?!.
In that case, how happy I am that he did not have access to his letters kept by me.
[1] Obviously this is the answer to a letter from HPB, published on the pages of Russkiy Vestnik (May – if I’m not mistaken), where she asks: «have you read the translation of Isis Unveiled ?».
[2] Fr. Duchess. Trans.
[3] Stepan Plyushkin is a fictional character in Nikolai Gogol‘s novel Dead Souls. In English, the words «pack rat» and hoarder are used for such people. – Translator.
[4] The Last Gorbatovs, Vs. Solovyov. Trans.
[5] Negligence, blunder (Fr.)
[6] Kind, kind as bread (Fr.)
[7] I agree: I do not recognize them as muslin ones. I believe in the possibility of their existence.
[8] The Duchess of Pomar had deeply been devoted to my sister all her life; but at that time she abandoned the Theosophical Society precisely because the authority and faith in Blavatsky, in the Paris circle, were, temporarily, successfully undermined by the intrigue of her enemies.
[9] Olcott is still in the best possible relationship with the Duchess.
[10] To whom?.. In Russia, where even now they do not know and are not interested in the theosophical affair.
[11] And it is not even possible for Mr. Solovyov, because he would have to confess his own activities and a double, unseemly game.
[12] On what?.. On the complete conviction of HP Blavatsky’s guilt – or on getting from her what Mr. Solovyov was seeking?.. That is the (Hamlet’s) question!
[13] With love (Ital.)
[14] It’s not the proper place for such documents, but they are kept by me, like all the letters I have mentioned here.
? But who told?
Да ктò говорил?
? sage-demigods
мудрецов-полубогов
Не полный перевод, не передано слово “противно”.
О различных рассказах, слухах и сплетнях – говорить противно и не стоит
… to compare
Пропущено слово “сличить”
? страница, page
(Стран. 227)
? written for him alone
для него одного писанных