THEO. Far more—if he is a _practical_ and really learned Occultist, and not one only in name. Occult sciences are _not_, as described, in Encyclopædias, “those _imaginary_ sciences of the Middle Ages which related to the _supposed_ action or influence of Occult qualities or supernatural powers, as alchemy, magic, necromancy, and astrology,” for they are real, actual, and very dangerous sciences. They teach the secret potency of things in Nature, developing and cultivating the hidden powers “latent in man,” thus giving him tremendous advantages over more ignorant mortals. Hypnotism, now become so common and a subject of serious scientific inquiry, is a good instance in point. _Hypnotic_ power has been discovered almost by accident, the way to it having been prepared by mesmerism; and now an able hypnotizer can do almost anything with it, from forcing a man, unconsciously to himself, to play the fool, to making him commit a crime—often by proxy for the hypnotizer, and _for the benefit of the latter_. Is not this a terrible power if left in the hands of unscrupulous persons? And please to remember that this is only one of the minor branches of Occultism. ENQ. But are not all these Occult sciences, magic, and sorcery, considered by the most cultured and learned people as relics of ancient ignorance and superstition? THEO. Let me remind you that this remark of yours cuts both ways. The “most cultured and learned” among you regard also Christianity and every other religion as a relic of ignorance and superstition. People begin to believe now, at any rate, in _hypnotism_, and some—even of the _most cultured_—in Theosophy and phenomena. But who among them, except preachers and blind fanatics, will confess to a belief in _Biblical miracles_? And this is where the point of difference comes in. There are very good and pure Theosophists who may believe in the supernatural, divine _miracles_ included, but no Occultist will do so. For an Occultist practices _scientific_ Theosophy, based on accurate knowledge of Nature’s secret workings; but a Theosophist, practising the powers called abnormal, _minus_ the light of Occultism, will simply tend toward a dangerous form of mediumship, because, although holding to Theosophy and its highest conceivable code of ethics, he practises it in the dark, on sincere but _blind_ faith. Anyone, Theosophist or Spiritualist, who attempts to cultivate one of the branches of Occult science—_e.g._, Hypnotism, Mesmerism, or even the secrets of producing physical phenomena, etc.—without the knowledge of the philosophic _rationale_ of those powers, is like a rudderless boat launched on a stormy ocean. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEOSOPHY AND SPIRITUALISM. ENQ. But do you not believe in Spiritualism?