Theos-Talk Archives (July 2002 Message tt00233)

W.E. Coleman in one of his articles wrote:

". . . Olcott asserts that one of them [Masters] once
visited him in his room in a materialized astral form,
and as proof of his objectivity left with him his
headcovering, which the Colonel retains to this day."

"This was no doubt a confederate of H. P. B., employed
for the purpose. It is of a piece with the action of
another confederate of Mme. B. about this time, of
whom Dr. Westbrook informs us. A woman, strangely
attired and veiled, came into the Doctor's house,
during a meeting there at which Rev. W. R. Alger,
Olcott, and H. P. B., were present, and handed the
latter a letter purporting to come from the
'Brothers,'-the messenger being presumed to be an
elementary. A few months afterward Dr, Westbrook
discovered that the presumed elementary was an Irish
servant girl, to whom Mme. B. had promised to pay $5
for the personation of the messenger of the
'Brothers.'Having failed to get her pay, she confessed the
fraud."

". . . The so-called appearances of Koot Hoomi at the
Adyar Headquarters have been shown to be, as a rule,
productions of M. Coulomb [another confederate of
Blavatsky]. . . . " [see
http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/cole1893.htm ]

If Brigitte Muehlegger and others actually believe what Coleman
writes above, then what about the Ooton Liatto case?
Muehlegger wrote sometime ago about Ooton Liatto and
his brother adept:

"That there where real visitors, that even could be
called 'adepts', as long [as] one clarifies what is
me[a]nt by 'adepts', and w[h]ich 'masonic order' in
this case they belonged to, I have never doubted . . .
. " [see
http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/masterschart.htm
and http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/muehlegger2.htm 
]

But if one accepts the reasoning and evidence behind
Coleman's statement above, why should we reasonably
conclude that in the Ooton Liatto case we are dealing
with "adepts" (however clarified and defined) who
belong to some "masonic order"? Would it not be more
reasonable especially in light of Coleman's statements
to conclude that Blavatsky simply "hired" two
confederates to "dupe" Olcott in New York?

Daniel 


Daniel H. Caldwell
BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
http://blavatskyarchives.com/introduction.htm