Theos-Talk Archives (December 2001 Message tt00308)

Brigitte wrote in part:

> Wouldn't you say now that indeed Olcott's description probably 
> indicates a drug influence ? Or if not, what proof can you cite 
that 
> it isn't ?
> In the opinion of others on this list it is, as Steve said, we see 
> evidence of herbs burning, herbs contained within a lacquered case 
> which was held to Olcott's nose, visual hallucinations, tactile
> hallucinations (the room was wet), profuse sweating,time 
distortion, 
> loss of consciousness, cognitive impairment, and stupefaction. Can 
> any reasonable person read this story and believe that there were no
> botanical products involved in this wonder? 
> Especially interesting is that these drugs are the means of "the 
> production of flowers as the adepts do it." That clearly indicates 
> that they used these substances to produce visual hallucinations and
> presumably insights. . . . can we agree now that the . . . 
> descripton of Olcott contains indications 
> of drug influence ? 

Brigitte, I am going to go over Olcott's February 1876 account and 
make a number of comments. I hope that you in turn will make some 
replies. I will quote part of Olcott's account and then comment. 
Quote more of Olcott's account and give further comments.

[Although my questions will be directed towards you Brigitte, I ask 
Steve and other interested readers for their answers and comments on 
my questions.]

Henry Olcott starts off by writing:

"Wonder treads upon wonder. I wrote an account of my [first]
interview with the Brother I took for a Hindoo Brahmin, and was sorry
enough afterwards I had said a word about it, either in letter or
lecture. [Then] I began to doubt my own senses and fancy the scene
had all been an objective hallucination but I have seen him again
yesterday and another man was with him.

"Other persons have seen this man in New York. He is not a Brahmin,
but a swarthy Cypriote. I did not ask him before of what country he
was.

"I was reading in my room yesterday (Sunday) when there came a tap at
the door. I said 'come in' and then entered the Brother with another
dark skinned gentleman of about fifty with a bushy gray beard and eye
brows.

Brigitte, are you willing to accept that two REAL ADEPTS actually 
came to Olcott's apartment? This is Paul Johnson's scholarly opinion 
in his first SUNY book. Olcott also writes that other persons had 
see Ooton Liatto in New York.

Brigitte, from some of your previous remarks one might assume that 
you believe Olcott was simply a creduous person with a wild 
imagination. You cite Olcott's PEOPLE FROM THE OTHER WORLD. From 
your previous comments it would appear that you were willing to 
attribute his observations at the Eddys to his "imagination" or to 
a "fantasy". You never gave any details about what you really thought 
happened so it is hard to know exactly what your thinking was.

But take note of this.

Olcott was at the Eddy farmhouse BEFORE HE MET MADAME BLAVATSY and 
observed paranormal phenomena. 

Were there drugs/fumes in the air at the Eddy farmhouse when Olcott 
was first there a month or two before Blavatsky ever arrived there?

But back to the 1876 account of Ooton Liatoo.

These two men knock on Olcott's door and enter. 

Brigitte, are you willing to concede that there were two living flesh 
and blood persons knocking on Olcott's door? Do you agree or disagree 
with Paul Johnson's assessment that there were two REAL flesh and 
blood persons visiting Olcott?

"We took cigars and chatted for a while.

"He said he would show me the production of flowers as the adepts do
it. At the same time pointing to the air, fancy --- the shadowy
outlines of flower after flower and leaf after leaf grew out of
nothing. The room was perfectly light; in fact the sun was shining
in. The flowers grew solid. A beautiful perfume saturated the air.
They were suspended as the down of a thistle in the air; each separate
from the other. Then they formed themselves into bouquets and a
splendid large one of roses, lilies of the valley, camelias, jessamine
and carnations floated down and placed itself in my hand. Then the
others separated again and fell in a shower to the floor. I was
stupefied with the manifestation.

Brigitte, are you and Steve suggesting that there was some kind of 
drug in the cigars?

Olcott was a smoker of cigars even before he met Madame Blavatsky. 

I see no good reason to believe that there was some kind of drug in 
the cigars. 

You may respond by saying well then how did all these flowers start 
appearing in the room? Your assumption may be that Olcott would 
NOT have seen the flowers if he had not been influenced by a drug 
that was in the cigars.

You may cite Olcott's own words:

"A beautiful perfume saturated the air" during the appearance of the 
flowers.

Brigitte, do you consider this "perfume" as evidence of a drug or is 
this perfume simply part of the "hallucination" caused by _______ ?

I could write a long article on various paranormal phenomena being 
accompanied by "scents" and "perfumes". And in all these variety of 
phenomena I am not aware of "drugs" being involved.

For example, the phenomena of Stainton Moses, the famous English 
medium, was often accompanied by "scents" and "perfumes". As far as 
I know, drugs were not involved in these phenomena.

Another example. Various meditators have experienced "scents" 
and "perfumes". 

I myself have experienced "scents" and "perfumes" in relationship to 
a person who had "paranormal" experiences happening to him.

In these instances the persons involved were not taking drugs. There 
were no fumes of drugs in the air.

In other words, the paranormal manifestations happened without drugs 
being in any way involved.

Hundreds of other examples could be given.

In regards to "the production of flowers", you and Steve may conclude 
that these flowers HAD TO BE "hallucinations" produced by drugs, but 
if one does a COMPARATIVE study of other phenomena produced by 
Blavatsky and expands one's study to also include the phenomena of 
Spirtualism as well as the experiences of ordinary people who have 
had paranormal experiences, I find many parallel accounts of similar 
manifestations that had nothing to do with drugs and that also appear 
to be "objective" in the sense that several people saw the same 
phenomenon.

Brigitte, I will produce testimonial evidence in my next posting that 
shows that D.D. Home (whom you already have put on the witness stand) 
was apparently able to produce "manifestations" comparable to "the 
production of flowers". These manifestations were done in the 
presence of several witnesses and there are no indications whatsoever 
that drugs were in any way involved.

I will also continue in Part II with my comments on Olcott's account 
of Ooton Liatto.

Daniel H. Caldwell
BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
http://hpb.cc