During the past three years I have made a more or less
exhaustive
analysis of the contents of the writings of Madame H. P. Blavatsky; and
I have traced the sources whence she derived - and mostly without
credit
being given - nearly the whole of their subject-matter. The
presentation,
in detail, of the evidences of this derivation would constitute a
volume;
but the limitations of this paper will admit only of a brief summary of
the results attained by my analysis of these writings. The detailed
proofs
and evidence of every assertion herein are now partly in print and
partly
in manuscript; and they will be embodied in full in a work I am
preparing
for publication, - an expose of theosophy as a whole. So far as
pertains to Isis Unveiled, Madame Blavatsky’s first work, the
proofs
of its wholesale plagiarisms have been in print two years, and no
attempt
has been made to deny or discredit any of the data therein contained.
In
that portion of my work which is already in print, as well as that as
yet
in manuscript, many parallel passages are given from the two sets of
writings,
- the works of Madame Blavatsky, and the books whence she copied the
plagiarized
passages; they also contain complete lists of the passages plagiarized,
giving in each case the page of Madame Blavatsky’s work in which the
passage
is found, and the page and name of the book whence she copied it. Any
one
can, therefore, easily test the accuracy of my statements.
In Isis Unveiled, published in 1877, I discovered some
2000 passages
copied from other books without proper credit. By careful analysis I
found
that in compiling Isis about 100 books were used. About 1400
books
are quoted from and referred to in this work; but, from the 100 books
which
its author possessed, she copied everything in Isis taken from
and
relating to the other 1300. There are in Isis about 2100
quotations
from and references to books that were copied, at second-hand, from
books
other than the originals; and of this number only about 140 are
credited
to the books from which Madame Blavatsky copied them at second-hand.
The
others are quoted in such a manner as to lead the reader to think that
Madame Blavatsky had read and utilized the original works, and had
quoted
from them at first-hand, - the truth being that these originals had
evidently
never been read by Madame Blavatsky. By this means many readers of Isis,
and subsequently those of her Secret Doctrine and Theosophical
Glossary, have been misled into thinking Madame Blavatsky an
enormous
reader, possessed of vast erudition; while the fact is her reading was
very limited, and her ignorance was profound in all branches of
knowledge.
The books utilized in compiling Isis were nearly all
current
nineteenth-century literature. Only one of the old and rare books named
and quoted from was in Madame Blavatsky’s possession, - Henry More’s Immortality
of the Soul, published in the seventeenth century. One or two
others
dated from the early part of the present century; and all the rest
pertained
to the middle and later part of this century. Our author made great
pretensions
to Cabbalistic learning; but every quotation from and every allusion to
the Cabbala, in Isis and all her later works, were copied at
second-hand
from certain books containing scattered quotations from Cabbalistic
writings;
among them being Mackenzie’s Masonic Cyclopaedia, King’s Gnostics,
and the works of S. F. Dunlap, L. Jacolliot, and Eliphas Levi. Not a
line
of the quotations in Isis, from the old-time mystics,
Paracelsus,
Van Helmont, Cardan, Robert Fludd, Philalethes, Gaffarel, and others,
was
taken from the original works; the whole of them were copied from other
books containing scattered quotations from those writers. The same
thing
obtains with her quotations from Josephus, Philo, and the Church
Fathers,
as Justin Martyr, Origen, Clement, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Eusebius, and
all the rest. The same holds good with the classical authors, - Homer,
Ovid, Horace, Virgil, Plato, Pliny, and many others. The quotations
from
all these were copied at second-hand from some of the 100 books which
were
used by the compiler of Isis.
In a number of instances Madame Blavatsky, in Isis
claimed to
possess or to have read certain books quoted from, which it is evident
she neither possessed nor had read. In Isis, i., 369-377, are a
number of quotations from a work of Figuier’s, that she claimed to have
taken from the original work, which she says (i., 369) now "lies before
us". As every word from Figuier in Isis was copied from Des
Mousseaux’s Magie
au Dix-neuvieme Siecle, pp. 451-457, the word "lies" in the
sentence
used by her is quite a propos. In Isis, i., 353, 354, et
seq., she professed to quote from a work in her possession, whereas
all that she quoted was copied from Demonologia, pp. 224-259.
In
ii., 8, she claimed that she had read a work by Bellarmin, whereas all
that she says about him, and all that she quotes from him, are copied
from Demonologia,
pp. 294, 295. In ii., 71, she stated that she had a treatise by De
Nogen,
but all that she knows about him or his treatise was taken from Demonologia,
p. 431. In ii., 74, 75, the reader is led to believe that certain
quotations
from The Golden Legend were copied by her from the original;
the
truth being that they were taken from Demonologia, 420-427. In
ii.,
59, she gave a description of a standard of the Inquisition, derived,
she
said, from "a photograph in our possession, from an original procured
at
the Escurial of Madrid"; but this description was copied from Demonologia,
p. 300.
In Isis, i., pp. xii, to xxii., is an account of the
philosophy
of Plato and his successors. Nearly the whole of these ten pages was
copied
from two books, - Cocker’s Christianity and Greek Philosophy,
and
Zeller’s Plato and the Old Academy. There are some 25 passages
from
Cocker and 35 from Zeller; and, of all these, credit is given for but
one
citation from Cocker and about a dozen lines from Zeller. In Isis,
ii., 344, 345, 9 passages are copied from Zeller, but one of which is
credited.
Here follows a list of some other of the more extensive
plagiarisms
in Isis. It includes the names of the books plagiarized from,
and
the number of passages in them that were plagiarized: -
| Ennemoser’s History of Magic,
English translation |
107 |
passages. |
| Demonologia, |
85 |
" |
| Dunlap’s Sod: the Son of the Man, |
134 |
" |
| Dunlap’s Sod: the Mysteries of Adoni, |
65 |
" |
| Dunlap’s Spirit History of Man, |
77 |
" |
| Salverte’s Philosophy of Magic,
English translation |
68 |
" |
| Des Mousseaux’s Magic au Dix-neuvieme
Siecle, |
63 |
" |
| Des Mousseaux’s Hauts Phenomenes de
la Magie, |
45 |
" |
| Des Mousseaux’s Moeurs et Pratiques
des Demons,. |
16 |
" |
| Supernatural Religion, |
40 |
" |
| King’s Gnostics, 1st
edition, |
42 |
" |
| Mackenzie’s Masonic Cyclopaedia, |
36 |
" |
| Jacolliot’s Christna et le Christ, |
23 |
" |
| Jacolliot’s Bible in India,
English translation. |
17 |
" |
| Jacolliot’s Le Spiritisme dans le
Monde, |
19 |
" |
| Hone’s Apocryphal New Testament, |
27 |
" |
| Cory’s Ancient Fragments, |
20 |
" |
| Howitt’s History of the Supernatural, |
20 |
" |
Among the other books plagiarized from may be named Eliphas Levi’s Dogme
et Rituel de la Haute Magie, and his La Science des Esprits, La
Clef des Grands Mysteres, and Histoire de la Magie;
Amberley’s Analysis
of Religious Belief, Yule’s Ser Marco Polo, Max Muller’s Chips,
vols. i. and ii., Lundy’s Monumental Christianity, Taylor’s Eleusinian
and Bacchic Mysteries (1875 ed.), Reber’s Christ of Paul,
Jenning’s Rosicrucians,
Higgins’s Anacalypsis, Inman’s Ancient Faiths in Ancient
Names,
Inman’s Ancient Pagan and Modern Christian Symbolism, Inman’s Ancient
Faiths and Modern, Wright’s Sorcery and Witchcraft,
Bunsen’s Egypt,
Payne Knight’s Symbolical Language of Ancient Art and Mythology,
Westropp and Wake’s Ancient Symbol Worship, Pococke’s India
in
Greece, Findel’s History of Freemasonry, The Unseen Universe,
Elam’s A Physician’s Problems, Emma Hardinge’s Modern
American
Spiritualism, More’s Immortality of the Soul, Draper’s Conflict
between Religion and Science, Randolph’s Pre-Adamite Man,
Peebles’s Jesus:
Myth, Man, or God, Peebles’s Around the World, Principles of
the
Jesuits (1893), Septenary Institutions (1850), Gasparin’s Science
and Spiritualism, Report on Spiritualism of the London Dialectical
Society
(1873), Wallace’s Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, and
Maudsley’s Body and Mind.
Two years ago I published the statement that the whole of Isis
was compiled from a little over 100 books and periodicals. In the Theosophist,
April, 1893, pp. 387, 388, Colonel Olcott states that when Isis
was written the library of the author comprised about 100 books, and
that
during its composition various friends lent her a few books, - the
latter
with her own library thus making up a little over 100, in precise
accordance
with the well-established results of my critical analysis of every
quotation
and plagiarism in Isis.
The Secret Doctrine, published in 1888, is of a piece
with Isis.
It is permeated with plagiarisms, and is in all its parts a rehash of
other
books. Two books very largely form the basis of this work, - Wilson’s
translation
of the Vishnu Purana, and Prof. Winchell’s World Life.
The Secret
Doctrine is saturated with Hinduism and Sanskrit terminology, and
the
bulk of this was copied from Wilson’s Vishnu Purana. A large
part
of the work is devoted to the discussion of various points in modern
science,
and the work most largely used by Madame Blavatsky in this department
of
her book was Winchell’s World Life. A specimen of the wholesale
plagiarisms in this book appears in vol. ii., pp. 599-603. Nearly the
whole
of four pages was copied from Oliver’s Pythagorean Triangle,
while
only a few lines were credited to that work. Considerable other matter
in Secret Doctrine was copied, uncredited, from Oliver’s work.
Donnelly’s Atlantis
was largely plagiarized from. Madame Blavatsky not only borrowed from
this
writer the general idea of the derivation of Eastern civilization,
mythology,
etc., from Atlantis; but she coolly appropriated from him a
number
of the alleged detailed evidences of this derivation, without crediting
him therewith. Vol. ii., pp. 790-793, contains a number of facts,
numbered seriatim,
said to prove this Atlantean derivation. These facts were almost wholly
copied from Donnelly’s book, ch. iv., where they are also numbered seriatim;
but there is no intimation in Secret Doctrine that its author
was
indebted to Donnelly’s book for this mass of matter. In addition to
those
credited, there are 130 passages from Wilson’s Vishnu Purana
copied
uncredited; and there are some 70 passages from Winchell’s World
Life
not credited. From Dowson’s Hindu Classical Dictionary, 123
passages
were plagiarized. From Decharme’s Mythologie de la Grece Antique,
about 60 passages were plagiarized; and from Myer’s Qabbala,
34.
These are some of the other books plagiarized from: Kenealy’s Book
of
God, Faber’s Cabiri, Wake’s Great Pyramid, Gould’s Mythical
Monsters, Joly’s Man before Metals, Stallo’s, Modern
Physics,
Massey’s Natural Genesis, Mackey’s Mythological Astronomy,
Schmidt’s Descent and Darwinism, Quatrefages’s Human Species,
Laing’s Modern Science and Modern Thought, Mather’s Cabbala
Unveiled,
Maspero’s Musee de Boulaq, Ragon’s Maconnerie Occulte,
Lefevre’s Philosophy,
and Buchner’s Force and Matter.
The Secret Doctrine is ostensibly based upon certain
stanzas,
claimed to have been translated by Madame Blavatsky from the Book
of
Dzyan, - the oldest book in the world, written in a language
unknown
to philology. The Book of Dzyan was the work of Madame
Blavatsky,
- a compilation, in her own language, from a variety of sources,
embracing
the general principles of the doctrines and dogmas taught in the Secret
Doctrine. I find in this "oldest book in the world" statements
copied
from nineteenth-century books, and in the usual blundering manner of
Madame
Blavatsky. Letters and other writings of the adepts are found in the Secret
Doctrine. In these Mahatmic productions I have traced various
plagiarized
passages from Wilson’s Vishnu Purana and Winchell’s World
Life,
- of like character to those in Madame Blavatsky’s acknowledged
writings.
Detailed proofs of this will be given in my book. I have also traced
the
source whence she derived the word Dzyan.
The Theosophical Glossary, published in 1892, contains
an alphabetical
arrangement of words and terms pertaining to occultism and theosophy,
with
explanations and definitions thereof. The whole of this book, except
the
garblings, distortions and fabrications of Madame Blavatsky scattered
through
it, was copied from other books. The explanations and definitions of
425
names and terms were copied from Dowson’s Hindu Classical Dictionary.
From Wilson’s Vishnu Purana were taken those of 242 terms; from
Eitel’s Handbook of Chinese Buddhism, 179; and from Mackenzie’s
Masonic
Cyclopaedia, 164. A modicum of credit was given to these four books
in the preface. But, inasmuch as, scattered through the Glossary,
credit was given at intervals to these books for a certain few of the
passages
extracted therefrom, its readers might easily be misled, by the remark
in the preface relative to these four books, into the belief that said
remark was intended to cover the various passages in the Glossary
where these books are named as the sources whence they were derived and
these alone, - that the passages duly credited to said books comprised
the whole of the matter in the volume taken from them, instead of being
but a small part of the immense collection of matter transferred en
masse to the Glossary. But the four named in the preface
are
not the only books thus utilized. A glossary of Sanskrit and occultic
terms
was appended to a work called Five Years of Theosophy,
published
by Mohini M. Chatterji in 1885. At least 229 of these terms and their
definitions
were copied in Blavatsky’s Glossary, nearly verbatim in
every
instance; and no credit whatever was given for this wholesale
appropriation
of another’s work. I cannot find a single reference to Chatterji’s
glossary
in any part of the later Glossary. Nearly all of the matter
concerning
Egyptian mythology, etc., in the latter, was copied from Bonwick’s Egyptian
Belief and Modern Thought. A small part of this was credited, but
over
100 passages from Bonwick were not credited. Nearly every word in
relation
to Norse and Teutonic mythology was copied from Wagner’s Asgard and
the Gods, - a little being credited, and some 100 passages not.
Most
of the Thibetan matter was taken from Schlagintweit’s Buddhism in
Thibet,
- some credited, but nearly 50 passages were not. Much of the material
anent Southern Buddhism was copied from Spence Hardy’s Eastern
Monachism,
- nearly 50 passages being uncredited. Most of the Babylonian and
Chaldean
material was extracted from Smith’s Chaldean Account of Genesis,
with nearly 50 passages not credited. The Parsi and Zoroastrian matter
was from Darmesteter’s translation of the Zend-Avesta, and
West’s
translation of the Bundahish in the Sacred Books of the East,
- mostly uncredited. Among other books levied upon in the compilation
of
the Glossary, principally with no credit given, are these:
Sayce’s Hibbert
Lectures Myer’s Qabbala, Hartmann’s Paracelsus, Crawford’s
translation of the Kalevala, King’s Gnostics, Faber’s Cabiri,
Beal’s Catena of Buddhist Scriptures, Rhys Davids’s Buddhism,
Edkins’s Chinese Buddhism, Maspero’s Guide au Musee de
Boulaq,
Subba Row’s Notes on the Bhagavad Gita, Kenealy’s Book of
God,
Eliphas Levi’s Works, and various others.
The Voice of the Silence, published in 1889, purports to
be a
translation by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky from a Thibetan work. It is
said
to belong to the same series as the Book of Dzyan, which is
true;
as, like that work, it is a compilation of ideas and terminology from
various
nineteenth-century books, the diction and phraseology being those of
Madame
Blavatsky. I have traced the sources whence it was taken, and it is a
hotch-potch
from Brahmanical books on Yoga and other Hindu writings; Southern
Buddhistic
books, from the Pali and Sinhalese; and Northern Buddhistic writings,
from
the Chinese and Thibetan, - the whole having been taken by Helena
Petrovna
Blavatsky from translations by, and the writings of, European and other
Orientalists of to-day. In this work are intermingled Sanskrit, Pali,
Thibetan,
Chinese, and Sinhalese terms, - a manifest absurdity in a Thibetan
work.
I have traced the books from which each of these terms was taken. I
find
embedded in the text of this alleged ancient Thibetan work quotations,
phrases, and terms copied from current Oriental literature. The books
most
utilized in its compilation are these: Schlagintweit’s Buddhism in
Thibet,
Edkins's’s Chinese Buddhism, Hardy’s Eastern Monachism,
Rhys
Davids’s Buddhism, Dvivedi’s Raja Yoga, and Raja
Yoga
Philosophy (1888); also an article, "The Dream of Ravan," published
in the Dublin University Magazine, January, 1854, extracts from
which appeared in the Theosophist of January, 1880. Passages
from
this article, and from the books named above, are scattered about in
the
text of the Voice of the Silence, as well as in the annotations
thereon, which latter are admitted to be the work of Blavatsky. Full
proofs
of this, including the parallel passages, will be given in my work on
theosophy;
including evidence that this old Thibetan book contains not only
passages
from the Hindu books quoted in the article in the Dublin Magazine,
but also ideas and phrases stolen from the nineteenth-century writer of
said article. One example of the incongruity of the elements composing
the conglomerate admixture of terms and ideas in the Voice of the
Silence
will be given. On p. 87, it is said that the Narjols of the Northern
Buddhists
are "learned in Gotrabhu-gnyana and gnyana-dassana-suddhi". Helena
Petrovna
Blavatsky copied these two terms from Hardy’s Eastern Monachism,
p. 281. The terms used in Northern Buddhism are usually Sanskrit, or
from
the Sanskrit; those in Southern Buddhism, Pali, or from the Pali.
Hardy’s
work, devoted to Sinhalese Buddhism, is composed of translations from
Sinhalese
books, and its terms and phrases are largely Sinhalese corruptions of
the
Pali. Sinhalese terms are unknown in Northern Buddhism. The two terms
in
the Voice of the Silence, descriptive of the wisdom of the
Narjols,
are Sinhalese-Pali corruptions, and therefore unknown in Thibet. Narjol
is a word manufactured by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, from the Thibetan
Nal-jor, which she found in Schlagintweit’s work, p. 138, - the r
and l being transposed by her.
Esoteric Buddhism, by A. P. Sinnett, was based upon
statements
in letters received by Mr. Sinnett and Mr. A. O. Hume, through Madame
Blavatsky,
purporting to be written by the Mahatmas Koot Hoomi and Morya, -
principally
the former. Mr. Richard Hodgson has kindly lent me a considerable
number
of the original letters of the Mahatmas leading to the production of Esoteric
Buddhism. I find in them overwhelming evidence that all of them
were
written by Madame Blavatsky, which evidence will be presented in full
in
my book. In these letters are a number of extracts from Buddhist books,
alleged to be translations from the originals by the Mahatmic writers
themselves.
These letters claim for the adepts a knowledge of Sanskrit, Thibetan,
Pali
and Chinese. I have traced to its source each quotation from the
Buddhist
scriptures in the letters, and they were all copied from current
English
translations, including even the notes and explanations of the English
translators. They were principally copied from Beal’s Catena of
Buddhist
Scriptures from the Chinese. In other places where the adept (?) is
using his own language in explanation of Buddhistic terms and ideas, I
find that his presumed original language was copied nearly word for
word
from Rhys Davids’s Buddhism, and other books. I have traced
every
Buddhistic idea in these letters and in Esoteric Buddhism, and
every
Buddhistic term, such as Devachan, Avitchi, etc., to the books whence
Helena
Petrovna Blavatsky derived them. Although said to be proficient in the
knowledge of Thibetan and Sanskrit, the words and terms in these
languages
in the letters of the adepts were nearly all used in a ludicrously
erroneous
and absurd manner. The writer of those letters was an ignoramus in
Sanskrit
and Thibetan; and the mistakes and blunders in them, in these
languages,
are in exact accordance with the known ignorance of Madame Blavatsky
thereanent. Esoteric
Buddhism, like all of Madame Blavatsky’s works, was based upon
wholesale
plagiarism and ignorance.
From the Caves and Jungles of Hindostan, although
published,
in letters to a Russian journal, as a veracious narrative of actual
experiences
of Madame Blavatsky in India, was admitted by Colonel Olcott in Theosophist,
January, 1893, pp. 245, 246, to be largely a work of fiction; and this
has been even partially conceded in its preface. Like her other books
it
swarms with blunders, misstatements, falsehoods and garblings. Full expose
of it will be included in my work. The Key to Theosophy, by
Helena
Petrovna Blavatsky, being a compendium of doctrines, its plagiarism
consists
in the ideas and teachings which it contains, rather than in
plagiarised
passages from other books.
In addition to wholesale plagiarism, other marked
characteristics of
Madame Blavatsky’s writings are these: (1) Wholesale garbling,
distortion
and literary forgery, of which there are very many instances in Isis
particularly. The Koot Hoomi letters to Hume and Sinnett contain
garbled
and spurious quotations from Buddhist sacred books, manufactured by the
writer to embody her own peculiar ideas, under the fictitious guise of
genuine Buddhism. (2) Wealth of misstatement and error in all branches
of knowledge treated by her; e.g., in Isis there are
over
600 false statements in Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity,
Assyriology,
Egyptology, etc. (3) Mistakes and blunders of many varied kinds - in
names
of books and authors, in words and figures and what not; nearly 700
being
in Isis alone. (4) Great contradiction and inconsistency, both
in
primary and essential points and in minor matters and details. There
are
probably thousands of contradictions in the whole circuit of her
writings.
The doctrines, teachings, dogmas, etc., of theosophy, as
published by
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, and affirmed to be derived from the quasi-infallible
Mahatmas of Thibet, were borrowed from the philosophies and religions
of
the past and present, with some admixture of modern science. There is
nothing
original in this "Wisdom of the Gods," or "Wisdom Religion," save the
work
of compilation into a composite whole of the heterogeneous mass of
materials
gathered by Madame Blavatsky from so many sources, and the garblings,
perversions,
and fabrications indulged in by her in the preparation of the system of
thought called theosophy. A careful analysis of her teachings shows
that
they were collected from the sources named below. (1) Madame Blavatsky
was a spiritualistic medium many years before she became a theosophist,
and in its inception theosophy was an off-shoot from spiritualism; and
from this source was a large part of her theosophy taken. I find that
its
teachings upon some 267 points were copied from those of spiritualism.
(2) In its later form, Hinduism constitutes one of the larger portions
of theosophy. I have not attempted an exhaustive classification of the
numerous minor points taken from this source, but I have noted 281 of
the
more important. (3) From Buddhism I have noted 63. (4) In the
beginnings
of theosophy, the basis of most of its teachings was derived from the
works
of Eliphas Levi, and I count 102 points therefrom borrowed. (5) From
Paracelsus’s
works were taken 49. (6) From Jacob Bohme, 81. (7) From the Cabbala,
86.
(8) From Plato, the Platonists, the Neo-Platonists, and Hermes, 80. (9)
From Gnosticism, 61. (10) From modern science and philosophy, 75. (11)
From Zoroastrianism, 26. (12) From Kingsford and Maitland’s Perfect
Way, 24. (13) From general mythology, 20. (14) From Egyptology, 17.
(15) From the Rosicrucians, 16. (16) From other mediaeval and modern
mystics,
20. (17) From miscellaneous classical writers, 16. (18) From
Assyriology,
14. (19) From Christianity and the Bible, 10. In addition, doctrines
and
data, in lesser number, have been derived from the following-named
sources:
The writings of Gerald Massey, John Yarker, Subba Row, Ragon, J.
Ralston
Skinner, Inman, Keeley, Godfrey Higgins, Jacolliot, Wilford, Oliver,
Donnelly,
Mackenzie, Bulwer-Lytton, Kenealy, and various others; also from
Chinese,
Japanese, Phoenician, and Quiche mythologies.
There is not a single dogma or tenet in theosophy, nor any
detail of
moment in the multiplex and complex concatenation of alleged
revelations
of occult truth in the teachings of Madame Blavatsky and the pretended
adepts, the source of which cannot be pointed out in the world’s
literature.
From first to last, their writings are dominated by a duplex
plagiarism,
- plagiarism in idea, and plagiarism in language.
San Francisco, California, U. S. A.,
2nd August, 1893.
Note
(1) Member, American Oriental Society, Royal Asiatic
Society of Great Britain and Ireland, Pali Text Society, Egypt
Exploration
Fund, Geographical Society of California; Corresponding Member,
Brooklyn
Ethical Association; and Member, Advisory Council, Psychic Science
Congress,
Chicago, Illinois.
