Theos-Talk Archives (August 1998 Message tt00329)

Bjorn writes:

>if you consider people
>like HPB to be channelers, yes, in that case I am advocating some of them.
-----------------------------------------
       No I don't regard Blavatsky as a channeler.  As you probably know,
there is a very important difference between a "mediator" and a "medium"
(channeler.)  The mediator is fully self-conscious and in full control and
possession of their faculties -  while in most mediumship, the channeler goes
into some nature of trance state (often assumed possibly.)  Mediatorship is a
heighted state of personal awareness, while mediumship is a lowered state of
personal awareness, with the medium even not retaining any memory sometimes.
     The mediator is inspired by an adept or nirmanakaya possibly, or Higher
Self, while the medium is used by subhuman entities or black.  The mediator is
inspired, while the medium is "taken over."  Blavatsky Theosophy warns against
mediumship and sees genuine mediatorship as a good and achievement.  Its hard
often to prove a case of one or another, except perhaps in the quality of the
message.
             - Jake J.