Theos-Talk Archives (March 2002 Message tt00429)

Dear Bill Meredith,

Below are four encounters Olcott had with the Masters:
http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/chart4stepmorya79bm.htm
http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/chart4stepmorya80bm.htm
http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/chart4stepgoldtem80bm.htm
http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/chart4stepmorya81bm.htm

There are at least five possible explanations of his
encounters with the Masters:

1. Olcott perhaps was simply lying and this whole
experience never actually happened.
2. Olcott was perhaps duped by a confederate hired by
Blavatsky to personate a Master.
3. Olcott was perhaps hypnotized by Blavatsky to see
this "imaginary" adept.
4. Olcott was perhaps under the influence of drugs & 
hallucinated the whole experience.
5. Olcott perhaps met a real physical man who was an
adept.

Steve Stubbs has already given his view about
Olcott's encounters. He believes Hypothesis 5 is the
best explanation. See his post at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/6269

Brigitte Muehlegger has avoided giving her honest 
and forthright opinion on these four encounters. 

Can we assume that Muehlegger agrees with Steve
Stubbs' explanation concerning Olcott's encounters
with the Masters?

Bill, since you gave several comments on the Ooton
Liatto case, I'm wondering what your view is on the
above four cases? What hypothesis do you believe
best explains Olcott's encounters? Do you agree or
disagree with Stubbs' explanation?

Daniel H. Caldwell
BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
http://blavatskyarchives.com/introduction.htm
"...Contrast alone can enable us to appreciate things
at their right value; and unless a judge compares
notes and hears both sides he can hardly come to a
correct decision."
H.P. Blavatsky. The Theosophist, July, 1881, p. 218.