Theos-Talk Archives (April 2006 Message tt00347)

First, I give below Emma Coulomb's basic explanation for the
appearances of the Masters:

=======================================================
Later] in one of [her good] moods [Madame Blavatsky] called me up 
and told me:   "See if you can make a head of human size and place 
it on that divan," pointing to a sofa in her room, " and merely put 
a sheet round it; it would have a magic effect by moonlight."  What 
can this mean?  I wondered.  But knowing how disagreeable she could 
make herself if she was stroked on the wrong side, I complied with 
her wish.  She cut a paper pattern of the face I was to make, which 
I still have; on this I cut the precious lineaments of the beloved 
Master, but, to my shame, I must say that, after all my trouble of 
cutting, sewing, and stuffing, Madame said that it looked like an 
old Jew---I suppose she meant Shylock.  Madame, with a graceful 
touch  here and there of her painting brush, gave it a little better 
appearance.   But this was only a head, without bust, and could not 
very well be used, so I made a jacket, which I doubled, and between 
the two cloths I placed stuffing, to form the shoulders and chest; 
the arms were only to the elbow, because, when the thing was tried 
on, we found the long arm would be in the way of him who had to 
carry it.  This beauty finished, made Madame quite another person.   

Let us see for what purpose the doll was made.  This was to give a 
convincing and material proof of the existence of the brothers [the 
Mahatmas], as their (said) invisible presence did not fully satisfy 
the truthseekers. 

Among the many apparitions to which this doll has been instrumental, 
I will choose one seen by Mr. Ramaswamier, in December, 1881.  The 
Mahatma he saw in his astral body on the balcony at the head-
quarters of the Theosophical Society in Bombay, on the memorable 
night of December, 1881, was no one else than Monsieur Coulomb, with 
the doll's head on his own. 

The doll plays the greatest part in these apparitions, and, as I 
have already explained, it is carried on somebody's head; but at 
times it is placed on the top of a long bamboo, and raised to show 
that it is an astral body; but when the doll has not been at hand, 
even a white cloth wrapped round the person who was to perform the 
Mahatma was at times used, and answered the purpose. 
========================================================

Now from Hodgson's account, he writes also about this "dummie" head:

==================================================
I was left without any doubt that the appearances [of the Mahatmas] 
might have been well produced by [Monsieur] Coulomb in disguise.  I 
have seen [Monsieur] Coulomb disguised as a Mahatma, and can 
understand that the figure may have been very impressive.   A dummy 
head (with shoulders), like that of a Hindu, with beard, &c. and 
fehta [turban], is worn on the top of the head of the person 
disguised.   A long flowing muslin garment falls down in front, and 
by holding the folds very slightly apart, the wearer is enabled to 
see, and to speak also, if necessary.  I do not think it in the 
least degree likely that any of the witnesses would have penetrated 
this disguise had the figure been even much nearer than it was, and 
the light much better. 

I cannot regard Colonel Olcott's testimony as of any scientific 
value.  In particular, his testimony to the alleged "astral" 
appearance [of the Mahatma Morya] in New York proves, in my opinion, 
no more than that he saw someone in his room, who may have been an 
ordinary Hindu, or some other person, disguised, as a Mahatma for 
the purpose, and acting for Madame Blavatsky.  And the same may be 
said of all his testimony to apparitions of Mahatmas. 

I need not here say much on the other alleged appearances of 
Mahatmas, in either their ordinary physical or their "astral" 
bodies.  A confederate in disguise is generally an easy and 
sufficient explanation of them. 
===========================================================

Now contrast and compare his explanations with Colonel Olcott's
testimony some of which can be found at:

http://blavatskyarchives.com/olcottandmahatmas.htm

And to be more specific, see this account by Olcott:

=========================================================
....On the evening of 4th August [1880], a Mahatma [Master Morya] 
visited HPB, and I was called in to see him before he left. He 
dictated a long and important letter to an influential friend of 
ours at Paris, and gave me important hints about the management of 
current [Theosophical] Society affairs. 
I was sent away before his visit terminated, and as I left him 
sitting in HPB's room, I cannot say whether his departure was a 
phenomenal disappearance or not....
===========================================================

Now are we to suppose that this Mahatma was Mon. Coulomb with
dummmie on head?

Remember Hodgson said:

===============================================================
A long flowing muslin garment falls down in front, and by holding 
the folds very slightly apart, the wearer is enabled to see, and to 
speak also, if necessary.  I do not think it in the least degree 
likely that any of the witnesses would have penetrated this disguise 
had the figure been even much nearer than it was, and the light much 
better. 
================================================================

Remember the dummie had fake eyes, the mouth would not move when the
"dummie" talked.....etc. etc.

Would Olcott see the obvious especially when he was in the same
room carrying on a conversation with the Mahatma?

Many other observations and points could be made simply by
contrasting and comparing Coulomb's and Hodgson's account with 
Olcott's firsthand testimony not to mention the testimony of other 
witnesses.

etc. etc.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc