Madame Muslin

"A Modern Priestess of Isis" is a book by Vsevolod Sergeyevich Solovyov, brother of the Russian religious philosopher Vladimir Solovyov. Some English editions of this book wrongly attribute it to the more well-known brother. Vsevolod, a popular Russian novelist, was briefly a member of the Theosophical Society. He met Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (the founder and leader of the society) personally on a semi-regular basis. Or so he claims...

"A Modern Priestess of Isis" is a scathing attack on Madame Blavatsky, who is depicted as emotionally unstable, an inverterate liar with delusions of grandeur, a plagiarist and a fraud. She is said to have confessed to Solovyov that all the supernatural phenomena surrounding her were really conjuring tricks! One of her Indian servants supposedly admitted to Blavatsky's sisters that the Mahatmas at Adyar were fake and made of muslin. After his disillusionment with Theosophy, Vsevolod got in touch with the British Society for Psychical Research, which was highly critical of Blavatsky and her antics. The author also claims that Blavatsky wanted to offer her services to the Czarist Okhrana (the secret police) in order to foment an anti-British rebellion in India.

I haven't bothered to double-check Vsevolod Solovyov's claims, but the book feels psychologically unconvincing. The author attempts to portray himself as an arch-sceptic, who questioned Blavatsky to her face at every possible occasion, despite being an initiated member of the Theosophical Society, even translating some of Blavatsky's works to Russian. He admits of having certain paranormal experiences, but never connects them to his membership in the society. Are we to believe Wikipedia, Vsevolod was romantically involved with a young employee of the Okhrana in Paris. Clearly, there is *something* more to this story than just one wacky "priestess of Isis". Besides, HPB must have had a lot of patience, if she kept this James Randi-like sceptic around herself!

The fact that the English translation has been abridged, including the correspondance between Vsevolod Solovyov and Madame Jelihovsky (Blavatsky's sister and a defender), also gives it a strange impression. What aren't we supposed to know? It's also curious that the author regards "Isis Unveiled" as better than "The Secret Doctrine", which he repudiates as simple run-of-the-mill occultism, suggesting that he never really read it. (Most historians of religion would consider the evolutionary perspective of the latter work to be an innovation.) To Vsevolod, Mme Blavatsky was essentially a failed Spiritualist who decided to form her own little sect when orthodox Spiritualism ran out of steam.

Personally, I don't really care either way. Regardless of whether Mahatmas Koot Homi and Morya were "real" or made of muslin, their revelations don't seem to ad up anyway. I said "The Secret Doctrine" was innovative. I didn't say it was true. For a somewhat different perspective on Madame Blavatsky, see "The Masters Revealed" by K Paul Johnson.