He is not admitted into the penetralia till he has been tried and proven as by fire.

Few, I take it, will deny that this is a stupendous picture of what the author has satisfied himself to be really and actually true. Few will refuse to recognise the moral beauty of the aims: to marvel at the results said to be arrived at. I shall have occasion to shew presently how that which is true of the Adept is also true of him who aspires to relations with the higher spirits who visit this earth. Meantime, the claims put forward for Occultism and its Adepts, must, for most of us, be matter of faith; as the power of Spirit is to the vast mass of mankind. Those who are familiar with the higher aspects of Spiritualism know that the power that spirits have to interfere with the recognised laws of nature (ie., such laws of nature as are imperfectly understood by physicists) is very great. Perhaps they have learned to fear such a power when unrestrained and untempered by a high moral consciousness. Such, no doubt, have found their consolation in reflecting that there is order in God's universe, and that above the irresponsible company who rush in helterskelter when the gates are set ajar-the counterparts of those spirits in the body who have acquired the lower occult arts by "the loathsome asceticism of the ordinary fakeer"-there are the pure and progressed spirits who guide, and warn, and teach the counterparts, these, of the unselfish, pure, and wise souls who have developed their inner faculties by that discipline of the mind which leads to the higher altitudes of Occultism." Whether in the body or out of the body, there is little distinction. Spirit may be in prison, but it is spirit still, and its inherent powers are susceptible of good or evil development.

2. It remains to draw out the instructive parallel · between the phenomena which our author describes as Occult and those known as Spiritual. It is important to remember that the former are claimed as the product of knowledge gathered by a still incarnated Spirit; the latter are alleged to be produced by disembodied spirit-agency. If in elaborating my argument I draw upon my own experience, I trust I may be pardoned. "I speak that I do know, and testify that which I have seen," and I can at least vouch for my facts, be the interpretation of them what it may. Ten years of intimate and uninterrupted experience, of day and night communion with Spirit, such as constitutes a mass of knowledge which might well have been spread over a life-time, enables me to speak with no uncertainty. While I fully recognise the value of the facts collected by Mr. Sinnett, while I bow in simple

reverence before the ideal that he has depicted, I should be false to my deepest convictions if I did not point out that Spiritualism has its unimpeachable facts too, and its aspects of moral beauty that deserve more recognition than Theosophists -probably because they are unfamiliar with them in their best form are usually willing to accord them. Let me not be understood as one who complains. They are generally acquainted only with the outer aspects of Spiritualism, and these are mean and unlovely. There are others which are perhaps not so difficult of attainment as the heights of Adeptship, but which present to the medium who would reach up to them no slight difficulty, no short probation, and no unworthy aim. Such results, when obtained, are jealously guarded; revealed, if at all, to the esoteric few, and usually locked within the breast of the aspirant who knows and can communicate of his knowledge only to such as have been disciplined to share it. There is Spiritualism and Spiritualism, as there is the Adept who, by the higher discipline of Ragi Yog, has reached his goal, and the "Yogi of the woods and wilds, disciplined by the physical development of Hatti Yog, whose dirt accumulates with his sanctity," and who earns a precarious living by astonishing his gaping fellow-creatures by displays of psychic conjuring. All are not of the same order. "One star differeth from another star in glory," and one spirit, in or out of the body, may be more earthly than its mate. It is not safe to include in one sweeping condemnation any large class. Distinguendum est!

"Occult Phenomena," says our author, “must not be confused with the phenomena of Spiritualism. The latter, whatever they may be, are manifestations which mediums can neither control nor understand. The former are achievements of a conscious, living operator comprehending the laws with which he works" (p. 12).

This statement requires some modification. It is true that the Medium does not understand all the laws (or any law perfectly) that govern the phenomena with which he is familiar. Passivity being a necessity in his case, as active energising is in the Adept, he obviously cannot "control" phenomena. But he can tell under what conditions they are likely to be procured; he can tell what causes will surely prevent their manifestation, and with certain surroundings he can almost certainly be the “medium" for their evolution. What of the Occultist? Mr. Sinnett details the circumstances under which raps were produced by Madame Blavatsky: circumstances precisely similar to those familiar to myself in such experiments. But how was it done? It was out of Madame Blavatsky's power to

give an exact explanation as to how these raps were produced" (p. 45).

We have details of the power of the Adept to be "present in spirit" in distant places, a power with which I am not unfamiliar. What is the modus operandi? Mr. Sinnett says frankly, "I am not pretending to give an explanation of how he produces this or that result, nor for a moment hinting that I know" (p. 53). That may well be, for he is no initiate; but these things cannot be explained, unless to those on a similar plane of intelligence. The pearls must be reserved for those who can appreciate them; and even these are scattered with a sparseness that seems often as curious as it is depressing. Mr. Sinnett points out a further difficulty: "It must be remembered that one can never have any exact knowledge as to how far her [Madame Blavatsky's] own powers may have been employed, or how far she may have been 'helped,' or whether she had not been quite uninfluential in the production of the result" (p. 53). Precisely so. I never know when my own powers are supplemented, or when they are superseded-unless I take pains to ascertain, which I can do. The external aid is often given only by way of drawing out my own faculties, though at times it supersedes them altogether. A person "quite uninfluential in the production of" a given result is what Spiritualists call a Medium. But Madame B. boasts that she is not, denies almost fiercely that she is, a medium. The distinction, I presume, is intended to be drawn between the embodied spirit who uses her, and the disembodied one who uses a medium. The distinction is very fine.

It is obvious, therefore, that so far the instructed Spiritualist and the Occultist are very much on a par. The Occultist can indeed produce certain phenomena, as he claims, by his own powers, though these are aided, and, it seems, at times. superseded. The Medium, who receives from progressed spirits what the Adept evolves from his own, can equally aid in the production of phenomena which modern Science cannot explain. The Occultist has his "Akaz," "a force for which we have no name" (p. 23). The Spiritualist, his Psychic Force, which seems to be indistinguishable in effects from its Hindû parallel. Both Adept and Medium are wisely enjoined to abstain from mere displays of psychic tricks. If the Medium do so, he sinks surely to be the vehicle of spirits who perform them. Mr. Sinnett tells us that "as a general rule, the display of any occult phenomena for the purpose of exciting the wonder and admiration of beholders is strictly forbidden" (p. 28). It has been one of the annoyances of my life since I became familiar with these psychic phenomena that they have been so fenced

round that I have found myself unable to demonstrate their reality to some whom I would willingly have sacrificed much to convince or gratify. Most complaisant and courteous in other respects, those with whom I have had to do are inflexible in this. They know their own business, and will brook no interference with it, though they are always ready to bow to my better knowledge of the world. Of that they know little, and for its opinion they care less. In this respect, too, they bear, as I should expect, a resemblance to the Brothers. Mr. Sinnett says, "If the picture of the Brothers that I have endeavoured to present has been appreciated rightly, it will shew them less accurately qualified, in spite of their powers, than persons of lesser occult development, to carry on any undertaking which involves direct relations with a multiplicity of ordinary people in this commonplace world" (p. 29). Precisely. It must needs be so. Whether the human spirit has gained its progress in or out of a body, it seems to be conditioned similarly in respect of those who live in this lower world of ours.

Broadly speaking," says Mr. Sinnett, "there is scarcely one of the phenomena of Spiritualism that Adepts can not reproduce by the force of their own will, supplemented by a comprehension of the resources of nature" (p. 12). He instances the production of raps under what he appears to consider circumstances not favourable to a medium, i.e, without a circle, without a table, on a window-pane, or on a glass clock-shade set on the hearth-rug. These are ordinary experiments, familiar to me. I have heard sounds suggestive of a carpenter's shop in full work proceed from a table which no one was touching. I have heard knocks, that caused the wood to vibrate violently beneath my hand, produced on a half-open door. I have heard the tiny sounds on a sheet of paper suspended from a pin and held in mid air. I have heard them on floor, walls, ceiling, chandelier, in the open air, in church, in public meetings, anywhere and everywhere, and each one characteristic of the Intelligence who made it, so that we never had the least doubt as to who was present when a certain knock was heard.

Mr. Sinnett further describes how at Simla Madame Blavatsky produced raps on a little table without contact. "After charging it with some influence, she would hold one hand about a foot above it and make mesmeric passes at it, at each of which the table would yield the familiar sound" (p. 46). I have repeatedly conducted a similar experiment. It was, indeed, habitual with us, after the table was "charged" to remove all hands from it, when the sonorous raps, some of

them like blows from a fist, would continue with equal vigour. Serjeant Cox, in his work on the Mechanism of Man, details how a large and very heavy dining table, capable of seating a dozen or more people (twenty would be nearer the mark), rose up to the hand held above it, creaking and groaning as though in pain. I have over and over again caused a large table to rise and follow the passes of my hands at a height of a couple of feet from its surface. These are experiments, many of them detailed in my Researches in the Phenomena of Spiritualism,* which were to us eight years ago matters of daily constant experience. But we never thought of attributing them to the exercise of any unaided powers of our own. We knew well enough that such was not the case. This is the interesting point in comparing Mr. Sinnett's experiences with my own.

I pass over the production of flowers within a closed room, the transmission of solid objects from one spot to another in spite of material obstacles-the passage of matter through matter (as it is crudely called) is, the author well says, for thousands of people who have had personal experience of it in Spiritualism, as certain a fact of nature as the rising of the sun" (p. 141)-and I go on to notice a very beautiful manifestation of occult power which is frequent with Madame Blavatsky, and of which I have had large experience also. It is the sound in mid air of a bell, sometimes striking a single note, at others a succession, and (in my experience) sometimes ringing violently. To Madame B. it is the signal that attracts her attention to some one of the Brothers who desires to converse with her. To me it was the signal of the presence of a spirit who used the generic name of MAGUS. I believe there were several of these, and I know less about them than I do about any other spirits who regularly communicated with me. The spirit who originally used the name came to me when I first became interested in the study of Occultism, and he was extremely skilful in producing manifestations of occult power. Under his guidance I made a long series of experiments which satisfied me of three things. First, that the powers claimed by the Occultists are real, eg., the projection of the soul, the effect of an energising will, and the like. Secondly, that they are of another order from Mediumship, though the results are very similar. Thirdly, that their exercise is incompatible with ordinary life in the world. I therefore abandoned the experiments, but not before they had done me a certain amount of physical mischief from which I believe that I have never fully recovered.

* Published in Human Nature, and soon, I hope, to be re-published, with additions, in a small volume.