Blavatsky and the Coulomb-Hodgson Affair (Hodgson Report, Society for Psychical Research)

One thing I notice in certain writings about Blavatsky is that at a certain point you will find a blunt, categorical statement that goes something like, ''then in 1885, Blavatsky was investigated by the Society for Psychical Research and it was determined that her occult abilities were faked and appearances of Mahatmas were faked. Game over. The end. Case closed.'' They do not mention the large amount of writings and research around the question or the fact that the SPR published a critique of the report in 1986. Therefore, in order to palliate this rather misleading tendency, I thought it good to post a reminder of all the basic information and more recent developments on this question, so people can decide for themselves and not have it mansplained by mainstream authorities.

Another major step in rehabilitating her much-maligned reputation occurred in 1986, when a work by Vernon Harrison, a research worker of disputed documents, was published (S.P.R. Journal (Vol.53 April 1986)).  It was a thorough study of the notorious Hodgson report, issued by the Society for Psychical Research (SPR) in 1885 and has since been the primary source of misunderstandings concerning Blavatsky. Harrison concluded that the report's "errors of procedure, its inconsistencies, its faulty reasoning and bias, its hostility towards the subject and its contempt for the 'native' and other witnesses, would have become apparent; and the case would have been referred back for further study." Since Blavatsky "was the most important occultist ever" investigated by the SPR, the process was a “wasted opportunity”.(p33) (http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/hpb-spr/hpbspr-h.htm#author).

The SPR also issued an accompanying press release in which a long-standing member of the S.P.R., Dr. Beloff states: "Whether readers agree or disagree with his conclusions, we are pleased to offer him the hospitality of our columns and we hope that, hereafter, Theosophists, and, indeed, all who care for the reputation of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, will look upon us in a more kindly light." (https://www.blavatsky.net/index.php/9-theosophy/history/382-spr-press-release)

A comprehensive overview of the history of the case:

https://theosophy.wiki/en/Hodgson_Report

Blavatsky Book Review: The Buddhism of H. P. Blavatsky, Henk J. Spierenburg

Here for the first time is a compilation in one volume of Blavatsky's perspective, both controversial and of stimulating value, for all interested in the Buddhist and Theosophic world view. During the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Blavatsky influenced prominent Buddhists of all kinds: from late nineteenth century Singhalese Buddhists to the sixth Panchen Lama. Throughout this century, Blavatsky's Theosophic exposition of Buddhist thought has gained influence and respect

Release Date:June 1991

Publisher:Point Loma Publications, Incorporated

Length:335 Pages

 

Contents

1- The Divine Buddhas (1-36)

Adibuddha

Avalokitesvara 

The Dhyani-Buddhas

2- The former Buddhas (27-25)

3- The Life of Gautama (36-73)

4- The History of Buddhism (74-102)

5-The History of Lamaism (103-134)

Tsong Kha-Pa

The Grand Lamas

7-The Scriptures (135-150)

8-The Teachings of Buddhism (151-200)

The Paths of the Arhats

Buddhsim and Esoteric Buddhism

15 page Bibliography, 120pp. index

This is a remarkable book, especially in terms of research and erudition. It is the only study of Blavatsky's writings that I know of that consistently researches the extensive references in her writings. Remarkably, the author even takes  it a step further and provides additional references that have been published since Blavatsky's time in order to corroborate, elaborate, or clarify Blavatsky's text. This painstaking, detailed work should help to establish two major points - any misguided notions of plagiarism on Blavatsky's part are largely dispelled because it becomes evident that Blavatsky makes extensive and coherent (and very critical) use of references. The second point is that it should dispel any notion that Blavatsky's writings were some strange mystical outpourings devoid of any careful research and methodical organization, because time after time, whether you agree with her theories or not, one is impressed by a level of discourse that demonstrates a deep familiarity with the source material. It is worth noting that Blavatsky made regular use of a relatively small, but quite substantial group of reference works, the main ones being:

 

Beal, Samuel  transl.  A Catena of Buddhist Scriptures from the Chinese. 1871.

Burnouf,  Eugène, Introduction  à  l’histoire  du  Buddhisme  indien, 1844.

Edkins. Rev. Joseph, Chinese Buddhism. 1880.
Eitel, Ernest J. Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. 1888.

Hardy, Spence, Eastern Monachism.1860

Lillie , Arthur. Buddha and early Buddhism (1881)

Rhys Davids,  T. W.,  Buddhism: Being a Sketch of the Life and Teachings of Gautama, the Buddha, 1877

Schlagintweit, Emil.  Buddhism in Tibet. 1863.

Say what you will of Blavatsky, this work demonstrates that one has to take her research seriously, one cannot deny her writings are not the result of careful, serious research. That is not to say that she is perfect, nor was she working with academic methodology; therefore Spierenberg is honest and points out various errors, curious interpretations, baffling explanations, often helping Blavatsky's  arguments by adding corrections and clarifications. These cases amount to roughly five percent of the references in my estimation. This however is not an easy work. The more erudite parts of Blavatsky's writings are notoriously difficult and the extracts provided are often too short to be  intelligible on their own; one has to be familiar with the original text to fully understand the meaning.

 

Moreover, Blavatsky's texts are often part of a comparative, perennialist perspective and so compiling them into a specialist context, separated from a broader argument, increases the fragmentary nature of this work. The author does a good job at assembling disparate passages on Buddhism scattered throughout her writings into a cohesive grouping of topics. At the same time, the incomplete nature of many of these topics serves to indicate the somewhat artificial nature of the assemblage. And it is to be noted that this is not a complete recension of all of Blavatsky's writings on Buddhism, but rather only those references that fit within the topical framework (presumable designed  to be a basic  exposition of Buddhist history and doctrine). As such one does not necessarily get a  good presentation of the distinct esoteric interpretation of Buddhism that one would from a more conventional essay format on the subject.

 

Two of the more successful sections are the ones on Mahayana scriptures (135-150) which gives research on the relation between the Tibetan Kanjur and Tanjur scripture collections and Blavatsky's enigmatic books of Kiu-te and stanzas of Dzyan. Also the section on the Trikaya (1750187) and especially the Nirmakaya  gives a good overview of the distinctive aspects of Blavatsky's Buddhist commentaries. With these points in mind, as a reference work for advanced students and academics, this is still a highly valuable work, if one keeps in mind that it presupposes a familiarity of Blavatsky's basic writings on Buddhism (and good general knowledge of Buddhism certainly wouldn't hurt) which can be found in the posthumous third volume of the Secret Doctrine (volume 14 of her collected writings, ''The mystery of the Buddha'' section), Isis Unveiled v. 2, chapter 11 and certain key entries of the Theosophical Glossary, notably the entries for Trikaya,  Triratna and Trisharana.