Theos-Talk Archives (March 2002 Message tt00332)

In spite of all the "hearsay" history we dredge up, or "expert" testimony you 
rely on -- neither you, I, nor anyone else can ever hope to "prove" anything 
-- either theosophically or scientifically. All we can do is posit theories 
that are either valid or not, based on the logic and thought we put behind 
them and their useful application, both spiritually and physically, as the 
case may be. 

I think, however, that the ABC view, in parallel with HPB's, is the correct 
one -- since no one has yet been able to refute the inherent logic behind its 
fundamental assumptions that start from zero and end with infinity, and 
inculcate a reasonable progression of involution and evolution of everything 
in between... Including, both an explanation of the nature of consciousness 
and of the many aspects of psychic phenomena, as well as the inclusion of 
every scientific principle and mathematical symbolization of modern science 
-- from relativity and quantum physics to the "all inclusive" 
Superstring/M-brane theories (plus some added irrefutable tie-ins furnished 
by my ABC theory concerning the mechanisms of consciousness and sensory 
perception) ... That, admittedly, like HPB's theories on reincarnation and 
karma, have been changed and modified considerably over the past 20 years -- 
as new scientific theories, principles and understandings have come forth 
based on the "thoughtful" research and work of others. 

In any even, thank you for helping me with the final research for my 
forthcoming book, "On the Threshold of a New Science and Technology" based on 
these theories. Be assured, where applicable, I will be sure to cite 
whatever useful historical contribution you might personally make -- if any. 
:-)

LHM

In a message dated 03/15/02 9:34:24 AM, bri_mue@yahoo.com writes:

>I am not an expert on Church history, but obviously Leon and the 
>theosophists who incorporated this story into their corpus
>didn't either. Looking up Leon's claim however I found out
>following:
>
>The views of Origen were condemned by the church at the Council of 
>
>Constantinople (scholars differ it was at the Home Synod in 543 or
>
>the second Council in 553) but Origen's view was that the soul existed
>
>the heavenly realm before descending into the world, and that is's
>
>present imprisonment in a material body is the result of a primeval fall
>
>from grace. The idea was never widely accepted and doesn't really
>
>resemble the idea of moving from body to body, as it is with 
>
>reincarnation.
>
>
>
>The first Christian reference to reincarnation is a passing remark by
>
>Justin Martyr near the middle of the second century, who makes a
>
>comment against the idea of human souls passing into the body of
>
>animals, although Justin is often listed as a believer in
>
>reincarnation.
>
>
>
>Irenaeus attacked the Gnostics in the last quarter of the second
>
>century and criticized Carpocrates' idea of the transmigration of the
>
>soul, his main criticism being that there was no continuity of memory.
>
>
>
>I think the idea of the unity of religions is a romantic concept that
>
>doesn't really hold up.
>
>
>
>Late 1876 Blavatsky wrote: "Mind is the quintessence of the Soul-
>
>and having joined its divine Spirit Nous-can return no more to earth. 
>
>IMPOSSIBLE." (BCW, 1:233)
>
>
>
>The next ten years hoever reincarnation in Blavatskyan Theosophy 
>
>advanced from being a side tenet to becoming next a"central part of 
>
>all religious traditions of the world."
>
>
>
>The new doctrines are simply expressed as an integrated part 
>
>of "esoteric Buddhism", while the older teachings are passed over in 
>
>silence.
>
>
>
>The description of life after death increasingly rested on a number 
>
>of Sanskrit terms, which, just like the title of his book, define the 
>
>positive Others. In a style that will later be typical of other major 
>
>theosophical movement texts, these Orientalist references are
>
>inter-spersed with appeals to contemporary science, including 19th 
>
>century pseudo-sciences such as mesmerism. Thus, from their
>
>exis-tence in Devachan, souls can appear to spiritualist mediums
>
>and magnetic somnambules because:
>
>
>
>The spirit of the sensitive getting odylized, so to say, by the aura 
>
>of the spirit in the Devachan, becomes for a few minutes that 
>
>departed personality, and writes in the handwriting of the latter, in 
>
>his language and in his thoughts as they were during his lifetime H 
>
>Thus -what is called rapport, is, in plain fact, an identity of 
>
>molecular V1bra-tion between the astral part of the incarnate
>
>medium and the astral part of the discarnate personality. (Sinnett 
>
>Esotetic Buddhism, pp. 146 f.; the term odylized refers to the 
>
>theories of Karl von Reichenbach ,1786-1869,, who believed that 
>
>mesmeric phenomena were due to a vital force that he called od or 
>
>odyle.)
>
>
>
>
>
>The Secret Doctrine is built on the belief in a pseudo-philosophia 
>
>perennis. Not only do Hindus and Buddhists believe in reincarnation, 
>
>but other traditions such as the Essenes and Druids are said to have 
>
>done so as well. However Theosophists her face the prob-lem of 
>
>explaining why some traditions do not seem to embrace this 
>
>purportedly "universal" Theosophy. In the particular case of 
>
>reincarnation, the lack of similar beliefs in most varieties of the 
>
>three Abrahamitic faiths, and especially Christianity, needed 
>
>explaining. The strategy employed by the theosophists to legitimize 
>
>Blavatsky's par-ticular view of reincarnation gave rise to
>
>severral modern legends.
>
>
>
>One of these legends claims that Christianity once did include the 
>
>belief in reincarnation, but that the powerful dignitaries of the 
>
>church have hidden this fact from ordinary believers. The Mahatma 
>
>Letters, Esoteric Buddhism or The Secret Doctrine however say nothing 
>
>on the matter.
>
>
>
>Neither does lady Caithness (a famous Theosophical pioneer ) in 
>
>texts devoted specifically to the theosophical interpretation of 
>
>Christianity and the Bible. As for Sinnett, he merely notes his own 
>
>utter disbelief in the "dreary blank" to which departed souls are 
>
>said to go in Christian Protestant theology, while awaiting the day 
>
>of judgment.( Sinnett Esoteric Buddhism, pp. 132 f.) 
>
>
>
>The earliest textual occurrence of the legend that links Christianity 
>
>with reincarnationist beliefs next appears to be in a book published 
>
>in 1888 by theosophist E.D. Walker, Reincarnation: A Study of 
>
>Forgotten Truth. The earliest mention in the sources ana-lyzed
>
>here is only a few years younger, in a popularization of the 
>
>mythology of The Secret Doctrine, William Q Judge's the Ocean of 
>
>Theosophy, published in 1893.
>
>
>
>So we find, first, that Jesus never denied the doctrine (of 
>
>reincarnation) and on various occasions assented to it, as when he 
>
>said thatJohn the Baptist was actually Elias of old whom the people 
>
>were expecting. -And following jesus we find St. Paul, in Romans ix, 
>
>speaking of Esauand Jacob being actually in existence before they 
>
>were born, and later such great Christian fathers as Origen, Synesius 
>
>and others believing and teaching the theory.-For five hundred years 
>
>after Jesus the doctrine was taught in the church until the council 
>
>of Constantinople .(Judge "Ocean of 'Theosophy", pp. 71f.)
>
>
>
>
>
>Even by its friends , Theosophy has often been asked to produce the 
>
>proofs of its claims. But never has provided these. In case of asking 
>
>others to proof that it would "not" be true is the same as
>
>the qustion that was posted to me a few months ago that I should 
>
>proof why Hitler was "not" alive and well after WWII anf flying
>
>around in a UFO. 
>
>
>
>See for example: Banner of Light 46/20 "Invitation to
>
>theosophists to enter upon the Field of Explanation and Proof", 
>
>Banner of Light 45/3: There have been many claims for occultism. From 
>
>Olcott but no proof. ; "Will Theosophy Please Explain," 
>
>Religio-Philosophical Journal 24/5, April 6, 1878:4. "Alas! Poor 
>
>Olcott! Where are your proofs?"
>
>
>
>In "Hints on Esoteric Theosophy", a pamphlet put out in
>
>Calcutta in the spring of 1882. The author , "H.X." (probably 
>
>A.O.Hume)replied to a long letter purportedly by "G.Y., late F.T.S.,"
>
>complaining of the Society's failure to develop the powers latent in 
>
>man put up by Hume to make his own points. G.Y. lays out a complaint 
>
>wrote: I have inquired and sought diligently, and 
>
>cannot discover that either I or any other Theosophist has learnt one 
>
>iota concerning "the hidden mysteries of nature, or the psychical 
>
>powers latent in man". Therefore I look upon the society as a 
>
>delusion . If I alone were left out in the cold I might attribute it 
>
>to my own shortcomings: but it is not so. Dozens of men, cleverer 
>
>than Madame Blavatsky, as as beneficient, pure and self-devoted as 
>
>Colonel Olcott, are in the same predicament; the whole Society is 
>
>left out in the cold. There is plenty of talk, but nothing is done".
>
> 
>
> 
>
> Bri--- 
>
>In theos-talk@y..., leonmaurer@a... wrote:
>
>> 
>
>> With reference to the below discussion by Muehlegger... Apparently 
>
>>prior to the sixth century, the Christian doctrine included a belief in 
>
>reincarnation. 
>
>> 
>
>> Some many years ago, while in the ULT library in New York, I 
>
>remember coming 
>
>> across a document, written in English (translated from the original 
>
>Latin) -- 
>
>> that was purported to be the "Anathema" issued by the Church at the 
>
>Fifth 
>
>> Ecumenical Council at Constantinople (called by the Roman Emperor 
>
>Justinean). 
>
>> As I remembered it, this canon forbade the teaching of
>
>Reincarnation 
>
>and 
>
>> Karma as it was understood and believed in by Jesus and by early 
>
>Church 
>
>> teachers, among other so called "Heretics," including Origen. I
>
>found 
>
>it 
>
>> recently on the web. Excerpts from the Anathema, along with a
>
>short 
>
>> introduction, follows: (from the Medieval Source Book: 
>
>> http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/const2.html:
>
>> 
>
>> Although Eastern religions accept reincarnation as part of their 
>
>doctrine, 
>
>> Christianity has rejected it since 553 AD, when it was dropped from 
>
>their 
>
>> doctrine at the Fifth Ecumenical Council at Constantinople. At
>
>that 
>
>time, 
>
>> the Roman Empire was divided into two parts: the Eastern Empire at 
>
>> Constantinople and the Western Empire at Rome. It has been noted 
>
>historically 
>
>> that the rejection of reincarnation was personally motivated by 
>
>Justinian, 
>
>> the Emporer of the Eastern Empire, and his wife, Theodora. Although 
>
>the vote 
>
>> at the Council relied on bishops from both the Eastern and Western 
>
>Empire, 
>
>> only two bishops from Rome came to Constantinople to vote. As two 
>
>previous 
>
>> popes had been murdered after they denounced the dropping of the 
>
>belief of 
>
>> reincarntion of the Bible, many of the Roman bishops were afraid to 
>
>vote 
>
>> against the wishes of Justinian. After the vote, all Bibles were 
>
>confiscated 
>
>> throughout both empires, burned and rewritten. 
>
>> 
>
>> Below is an excerpt from the Fifth Ecumenical Council. 
>
>> 
>
>> THE ANATHEMAS AGAINST ORIGEN
>
>> I.
>
>> IF anyone asserts the fabulous pre-existence of souls, and shall
>
>assert 
>
>the 
>
>> monstrous restoration which follows from it: let him be anathema.
>
>> 
>
>> II.
>
>> IF anyone shall say that the creation (thu paragwghn) of all 
>
>reasonable 
>
>> things includes only intelligences (noas) without bodies and
>
>altogether 
>
>> immaterial, having neither number nor name, so that there is unity 
>
>between 
>
>> them all by identity of substance, force and energy, and by their
>
>union 
>
>with 
>
>> and knowledge of God the Word; but that no longer desiring the
>
>sight 
>
>of God, 
>
>> they gave themselves over to worse things, each one following his 
>
>own 
>
>> inclinations, and that they have taken bodies more or less subtile,
>
>and 
>
>have 
>
>> received names, for among the heavenly Powers there is a difference 
>
>of names 
>
>> as there is also a difference of bodies; and thence some became and 
>
>are 
>
>> called Cherubims, others Seraphims, and Principalities, and Powers, 
>
>and 
>
>> Dominations, and Thrones, and Angels, and as many other heavenly 
>
>orders as 
>
>> there may be: let him be anathema.
>
>> 
>
>> III.
>
>> IF anyone shall say that the sun, the moon and the stars are also 
>
>reasonable 
>
>> beings, and that they have only become what they are because they 
>
>turned 
>
>> towards evil: let him be anathema.
>
>> 
>
>> IV.
>
>> IF anyone shall say that the reasonable creatures in whom the
>
>divine 
>
>love had 
>
>> grown cold have been hidden in gross bodies such as ours, and have 
>
>been 
>
>> called men, while those who have attained the lowest degree of 
>
>wickedness 
>
>> have shared cold and obscure bodies and are become and called 
>
>demons and evil 
>
>> spirits: let him be anathema.