Theos-Talk Archives (December 2003 Message tt00102)

----- Original Message -----
From: Bart Lidofsky
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 5:53 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Forget Bailey

> Well, according to Bailey, Einstein was wrong, and matter and energy
> are NOT two facets of the same thing, which knocks out much of modern
>> science.

Well, she may have respected Einstein, but she did not understand him
at all. Otherwise, she would have never included the planet Vulcan in
her astrology, ethereal or otherwise.
>Bart.

The MAHATMA LETTERS to A. P. SINNETT
from the Mahatmas M. & K. H.
[For K.H.'s replies to these queries see post Letter 23b. -- ED.]
(14) Could any other planets besides those known to modern astronomy (I do
not mean mere planetoids) be discovered by physical instruments if properly
directed? KH Letters.

(14) They must be. Not all of the Intra-Mercurial planets, nor yet those in
the orbit of Neptune are yet discovered, though they are strongly suspected.
We know that such exist and where they exist; and that there are innumerable
planets "burnt out" they say, -- in obscuration we say; -- planets in
formation and not yet luminous, etc. But then "we know" is of little use to
science, when the Spiritualists will not admit our knowledge. KH Letters.

"The sun is the substitute for the invisible inter-Mercurial planet." (S.D.
Vol. III, 459) HP Blavatsky.

Sun, veiling Vulcan. EA 50. AAB.

"Vulcan is within the orbit of Mercury." (C. F. 206,) AAB.