Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#2)
Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2020 4:30 am
Babaji [Bawajee] [Bowajee] [M. Krishnamachari] [S. Krishnamachari] [S. Krishnaswami Iyengar or Aiyangar] [Darbhagiri Nath] [Gwala K. Deb] [Babajee D. Nath]
by Theosophy Wiki
Accessed: 9/6/20
I was also, for reasons that will hereafter appear, compelled to discard altogether the evidence of Mr. Babajee D. Nath, who appeared to us at the time of our First Report to be a primary witness for the ordinary physical existence of the Mahatmas.
Babaji with T. Subba Rao and H. P. Blavatsky
Babaji (also known as M. Krishnamachari, S. Krishnamachari, S. Krishnaswami Iyengar or Aiyangar, and Darbhagiri Nath) was a young Maratha Brahmin of South India. He was at one time a clerk in the Collector's office in Nellore. In the early 1880s, after the arrival of the Founders to India he joined the staff at the theosophical headquarters in Bombay and assumed the name of "Babaji" (also spelled "Bawajee" or "Bowajee").[1] A few months after this he became a probationary chela of Mahatma K.H., assuming the mystery name Dharbagiri Nath.[2] The Master frequently referred to him as "the little man", due to his small stature. Babaji was present at the time of the Hodgson Report at Adyar.[3] He eventually failed as a chela and died in India in obscurity.
Dharbagiri Nath
In late 1882 Gwala K. Deb (an accepted chela of the Master K.H. whose mystical name also was Dharbagiri Nath) was to travel to Simla from Darjeeling to deliver a letter from Mahatma K.H. to Mr. Sinnett. However, Deb could not leave Darjeeling, since his physical body was being prepared for a certain occult work and could not be contaminated with the magnetism of the world. Babaji was then asked to allow him to use his own body on certain occasions, in order to perform the allotted task.[4] In one of his letters, Master K.H. wrote to Sinnett:
It seems that after this event he started to use the name Dharbagiri Nath publicly, which produced confusion in the minds of some members between the accepted and the probationary chelas. Mme. Blavatsky wrote to Mr. Sinnett:
Failure as a disciple
In February 1885, he accompanied Mme. Blavatsky and others to Europe and was devoted to her. But in 1886 he turned against her, accusing her of desecrating the Masters’ names by connecting them with psychic phenomena. He caused much trouble in theosophical circles in Europe and England, especially at Elberfeld with the Gebhard family. Babaji exercised considerable influence over Frank Gebhard and other theosophists, largely because he was a Hindu claiming to be an advanced chela.[8]
In a letter dated June, 3, 1886, written by Mme Blavatsky to Col. Olcott from Elberfeld, Germany (and originally published in The Theosophist, Vol. LII, No. 11, August, 1931, pp. 673-675) she writes: "And now since he came here he said to my face before all the Gebhard family that I knew nothing of the esoteric teaching; Isis was full of ludicrous mistakes; my Theosophist articles likewise".[9]
Eventually, Babaji failed to remain a chela. Mme. Blavatsky wrote to C. W. Leadbeater, who at the time was a chela of Mater K.H.:
When this letter was in transit, the Master K.H. precipitated: "The little man has failed and will reap his reward".[11]
Babaji returned to India and eventually died in obscurity.
See brief biography in Damodar and the Pioneers of the Theosophical Movement, p. 537. See The Letters of H. P. Blavatsky to A. P. Sinnett (book) , pp. 286, 335, 336, 340; and Letters from the Masters of the Wisdom I: 132
Online resources
Articles
• The Theosophical Mahatmas. A Critique of Paul Johnson’s New Myth, Part 2, Ch. 8, by David Pratt
Notes
1. The Theosophical Mahatmas. A Critique of Paul Johnson’s New Myth, Part 2, Ch. 8, by David Pratt
2. A. Trevor Barker, The Letters of H. P. Blavatsky to A. P. Sinnett Letter No. LXX, (Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1973), 170.
3. George E. Linton and Virginia Hanson, eds., Readers Guide to The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett (Adyar, Chennai, India: Theosophical Publishing House, 1972), 218
4. Curuppumullage Jinarājadāsa, The "K. H." Letters to C. W. Leadbeater (Adyar, Madras: The Theosophical Publishing House, 1980), 76-77.
5. Vicente Hao Chin, Jr., The Mahatma Letters to A.P. Sinnett in chronological sequence No. 44 (Quezon City: Theosophical Publishing House, 1993), ???.
6. A. Trevor Barker, The Letters of H. P. Blavatsky to A. P. Sinnett Letter No. LXX, (Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1973), 170.
7. A. Trevor Barker, The Letters of H. P. Blavatsky to A. P. Sinnett Letter No. LXXII, (Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1973), 174.
8. George E. Linton and Virginia Hanson, eds., Readers Guide to The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett (Adyar, Chennai, India: Theosophical Publishing House, 1972), 218.
9. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Collected Writings vol. VII (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1988), 50.
10. Curuppumullage Jinarājadāsa, K. H. Letters to C. W. Leadbeater, (Adyar, Madras: Theosophical Publishing House, 1980), 85-86.
11. Curuppumullage Jinarājadāsa, The "K. H." Letters to C. W. Leadbeater (Adyar, Madras: The Theosophical Publishing House, 1980), 52.
by Theosophy Wiki
Accessed: 9/6/20
The Letters of H. P. Blavatsky to A. P. Sinnett
Letter No. 175
{Wurzburg, Nov.}B. J. Padshah became indignant that the original letters published in the Xian College Magazine were not shown to Madame Blavatsky for explanation. He asked Mr. Hodgson why they were not shown to her. Mr. Hodgson consented to give Padsha the documents on condition that he would take them personally to Mad. Blavatsky at Wurzburg and keep his eyes wide upon the letters while Madame B. reads them and, taking care that she might not in any way interfere with them, bring them back safe to the S.P.R. This is what Padshah told me, as far as I can remember.
Babajee D. Nath.Bowajee says, he is not sure whether Hodgson meant that I might destroy them — fraudulently — or phenomenally. You ought to send for Padshah and examine him. If Mr. Hodgson was afraid that I would make away with them phenomenally then it is just what I believe I wrote to Mrs. Sinnett, or to you from Wurzburg and I said and repeat it that in their hearts the Coulombs and the padris believe in the powers of the Masters and also to an extent in my own. This is why they would not allow Hodgson to show to me those letters at Adyar, nor would Myers and Hodgson trust Mr. Sinnett with them for that same reason. Bowajee says Mohini can tell you all; that Hodgson told him secretly that personally he believed in the Mahatmas and even in my occult powers. — Make your inferences.
H. P. B.
I was also, for reasons that will hereafter appear, compelled to discard altogether the evidence of Mr. Babajee D. Nath, who appeared to us at the time of our First Report to be a primary witness for the ordinary physical existence of the Mahatmas.
[Statement of] Mr. Babajee D. Nath. [First published in Richard Hodgson's "Account of Personal Investigations in India, and Discussion of the Authorship of the 'Koot Hoomi' Letters," Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, Volume III, 1885, Appendix IV, pp. 329-330. ]
In reply to the circular inquiry: -
August 30th, 1884.
Having been called upon to state what I know in regard to the Occult Room in the upstairs and its condition on, before, or after the 18th May, 1884, I beg to say that I had before that date examined the Occult Room, the Shrine, and its surroundings several times. I had an interest in so examining, as I wanted to be able to give my unqualified testimony conscientiously to a very prominent skeptical gentleman at Madras, who knows me well and who urged me to state all my experiences about phenomena. Madame Blavatsky herself asked me on several occasions to examine, as she knew my relation to the gentleman. I was also present on the day when Mr. Coulomb gave the charge of the upstairs to our party and when he exposed himself audaciously. I remember very well that, during the last (VIII.) anniversary, I one day tapped well on the papered wall behind the Shrine in various places, and found, from the noise produced, that it was a whole wall. I have tapped on the wall after Coulomb’s contrivances, and found that there is a marked difference between the portion of the wall where he has cut open and between other portions of it. The former when tapped produces now the noise of a hollow, incomplete wall; while the latter portion stands the test of tapping. I know more of the phenomena, of Madame Blavatsky, and of the Coulombs than any outsider; I am in so intimate relations at the headquarters that I have been treated with matters of a confidential nature unreservedly. Even Madame Coulomb herself had been along treating me as a real friend, and telling much and often of what she said she would not tell others. I have, therefore, no hesitation at all in stating for a fact that any contrivances whatever, like trap-doors, &c., that are now found had nothing at all to do with Madame Blavatsky, who had not the remotest idea of them. The Coulombs are the sole authors of the plot. It is worth mentioning here that Mr. Coulomb worked up the walls, set up the doors, and did everything without allowing a single carpenter, mason, or coolie, to go upstairs; and he was furious if any of us went up to see. To prove that Madame Blavatsky was not a party to the scheme, I shall cite one fact. She allowed - nay, requested - Mr. G. Subbiah Chetty Garu, F. T. S., to examine the work done. He went one day to see it. Coulomb was furious, and did not allow him, but drove him out, and told Madame Blavatsky that none of us should go there at all, since he said he was working without clothes alone. This was a mere pretext, as on that occasion he was not so, and as we have all seen him often with only a pair of dirty trousers. Instances can be multiplied. I must conclude by saying that the "phenomena" of the Mahatmas do not stand in need of Coulombian contrivances, as I have witnessed at different times and different places when and where there were no such trap-doors, and I have seen and know those exalted sages who are the authors of the "phenomena." I can therefore assure all my friends that the Coulombs had got up a "Christian plot" during Madame Blavatsky’s absence.
-- The Hodgson Report: Report on Phenomena Connected With Theosophy, by Richard Hodgson and the Society for Psychical Research
Babaji with T. Subba Rao and H. P. Blavatsky
Babaji (also known as M. Krishnamachari, S. Krishnamachari, S. Krishnaswami Iyengar or Aiyangar, and Darbhagiri Nath) was a young Maratha Brahmin of South India. He was at one time a clerk in the Collector's office in Nellore. In the early 1880s, after the arrival of the Founders to India he joined the staff at the theosophical headquarters in Bombay and assumed the name of "Babaji" (also spelled "Bawajee" or "Bowajee").[1] A few months after this he became a probationary chela of Mahatma K.H., assuming the mystery name Dharbagiri Nath.[2] The Master frequently referred to him as "the little man", due to his small stature. Babaji was present at the time of the Hodgson Report at Adyar.[3] He eventually failed as a chela and died in India in obscurity.
Dharbagiri Nath
In late 1882 Gwala K. Deb (an accepted chela of the Master K.H. whose mystical name also was Dharbagiri Nath) was to travel to Simla from Darjeeling to deliver a letter from Mahatma K.H. to Mr. Sinnett. However, Deb could not leave Darjeeling, since his physical body was being prepared for a certain occult work and could not be contaminated with the magnetism of the world. Babaji was then asked to allow him to use his own body on certain occasions, in order to perform the allotted task.[4] In one of his letters, Master K.H. wrote to Sinnett:
And now good-bye, I ask you again — do not frighten my little man; he may prove useful to you some day — only do not forget — he is but an appearance.[5]
It seems that after this event he started to use the name Dharbagiri Nath publicly, which produced confusion in the minds of some members between the accepted and the probationary chelas. Mme. Blavatsky wrote to Mr. Sinnett:
He has as much right to call himself Dharbagiri Nath, as “Babaji.” There is—a true Dh. Nath, a chela, who is with Master K. H. for the last 13 or 14 years; who was at Darjeeling, and he is he of whom Mahatma K. H. wrote to you at Simla. For reasons I cannot explain he remained at Darjeeling. You heard him ONCE, you never saw him, but you saw his portrait his alter ego physically and his contrast diametrically opposite to him morally, intellectually and so on. Krishna Swami’s, or Babaji’s deception does not rest in his assuming the name, for it was the mystery name chosen by him when he became the Mahatma’s chela; but in his profiting of my lips being sealed; of people’s erroneous conceptions about him that he, this present Babaji was a HIGH chela whereas he was only a probationary one. . .[6]
[I]f he had the right to call himself Dharb. Nath he had no right to abuse of this position by assuming an attitude which only the real Dh. Nath would have the right to assume, and which he never would, however . . . he took advantage of the position assigned to him temporarily — to harm me and the Cause, and several Theosophists, who see in him the real, instead of the reflection of Dh. N. the high chela.[7]
Failure as a disciple
In February 1885, he accompanied Mme. Blavatsky and others to Europe and was devoted to her. But in 1886 he turned against her, accusing her of desecrating the Masters’ names by connecting them with psychic phenomena. He caused much trouble in theosophical circles in Europe and England, especially at Elberfeld with the Gebhard family. Babaji exercised considerable influence over Frank Gebhard and other theosophists, largely because he was a Hindu claiming to be an advanced chela.[8]
In a letter dated June, 3, 1886, written by Mme Blavatsky to Col. Olcott from Elberfeld, Germany (and originally published in The Theosophist, Vol. LII, No. 11, August, 1931, pp. 673-675) she writes: "And now since he came here he said to my face before all the Gebhard family that I knew nothing of the esoteric teaching; Isis was full of ludicrous mistakes; my Theosophist articles likewise".[9]
Eventually, Babaji failed to remain a chela. Mme. Blavatsky wrote to C. W. Leadbeater, who at the time was a chela of Mater K.H.:
[Babaji] was sent to Simla to Mr. S [Mr. Sinnett], that is to say, he gave up his personality to a real chela, Dharbagiri Nath, and has assumed his name since then. As I was under pledge of silence I could not contradict him when I heard him bragging that he had lived with his Master in Tibet and was an accepted regular chela. But now when he failed as a “probationary” owing to personal ambition, jealousy of Mohini, and a suddenly developed rage and envy even to hatred of Colonel and myself –- now Master ordered me to say the truth.[10]
When this letter was in transit, the Master K.H. precipitated: "The little man has failed and will reap his reward".[11]
Babaji returned to India and eventually died in obscurity.
See brief biography in Damodar and the Pioneers of the Theosophical Movement, p. 537. See The Letters of H. P. Blavatsky to A. P. Sinnett (book) , pp. 286, 335, 336, 340; and Letters from the Masters of the Wisdom I: 132
Online resources
Articles
• The Theosophical Mahatmas. A Critique of Paul Johnson’s New Myth, Part 2, Ch. 8, by David Pratt
Notes
1. The Theosophical Mahatmas. A Critique of Paul Johnson’s New Myth, Part 2, Ch. 8, by David Pratt
2. A. Trevor Barker, The Letters of H. P. Blavatsky to A. P. Sinnett Letter No. LXX, (Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1973), 170.
3. George E. Linton and Virginia Hanson, eds., Readers Guide to The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett (Adyar, Chennai, India: Theosophical Publishing House, 1972), 218
4. Curuppumullage Jinarājadāsa, The "K. H." Letters to C. W. Leadbeater (Adyar, Madras: The Theosophical Publishing House, 1980), 76-77.
5. Vicente Hao Chin, Jr., The Mahatma Letters to A.P. Sinnett in chronological sequence No. 44 (Quezon City: Theosophical Publishing House, 1993), ???.
6. A. Trevor Barker, The Letters of H. P. Blavatsky to A. P. Sinnett Letter No. LXX, (Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1973), 170.
7. A. Trevor Barker, The Letters of H. P. Blavatsky to A. P. Sinnett Letter No. LXXII, (Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1973), 174.
8. George E. Linton and Virginia Hanson, eds., Readers Guide to The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett (Adyar, Chennai, India: Theosophical Publishing House, 1972), 218.
9. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Collected Writings vol. VII (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1988), 50.
10. Curuppumullage Jinarājadāsa, K. H. Letters to C. W. Leadbeater, (Adyar, Madras: Theosophical Publishing House, 1980), 85-86.
11. Curuppumullage Jinarājadāsa, The "K. H." Letters to C. W. Leadbeater (Adyar, Madras: The Theosophical Publishing House, 1980), 52.