Theos-Talk Archives (July 2004 Message tt00000)

Daniel,

I think we are mixing apples and oranges when we compare the manifestation of 
simple substances like base metals, non living carbonaceous substances like 
paper along with the writing on it, or simple plaster -- with more complex 
structures like glazed and painted porcelain of particular design, or manufactured 
items like computers (that began this commentary in the first place). 

The concept of a light manipulated hologram was just proposed as one 
possibility of a manifestation of a physical form, and did not preclude other methods 
of so called "materialization's" -- such as actual disassembly and reassembly 
of material particles that make up a simple form, precipitation of writing on 
existing or manifested paper of temporary or permanent form -- depending on 
the method of precipitation or assembly, etc. Such phenomena can be done by 
many different methods of correlation and manipulation of coenergetic forces on 
or through multiple levels of hyperspace. My interest, primarily, is not in 
whether of not such phenomena is real or possible, but what are the methods and 
correlation of forces that are necessary to make them occur -- regardless of 
the techniques used or the path taken to form the objects. 

In any event, I have no arguments against the ability of an Adept to carry 
out such phenomena under certain conditions and limitations -- which I'm not 
prepared to argue about in the face of your quoting of observers statements that 
cannot be verified as to their veracity or accuracy, or generalized statements 
by respected teachers such as HPB and the Masters that are misleading since 
they do not thoroughly explain that there are certain qualifications and 
conditions that make it impossible to carry out such phenomena with particular forms 
or complexities of matter. 

Thus, it is certainly reasonable to have doubts that the highest trained 
Adept could disassemble an automobile or a computer and reassemble them, in their 
functional entirety, in another location in physical space (or even the same 
location). It is also reasonable to doubt that such objects, or even their 
disassembled parts could pass through certain types of walls. (Although, passing 
through a wall of water or a wall of flowing air would not be much trouble.:-)

As for the statements of HPB regarding such phenomena as "passing matter 
through matter," or dematerializing and rematerializing certain physical forms -- 
I still contend that the qualifications and conditions under which such acts 
can occur are quite limited and do not cover every form of inorganic matter of 
a more complex chemical or structural nature, and certainly not organic or 
living matter. (However it certainly would be easy to pass astral matter through 
physical matter -- which is one way of looking at what HPB said. :-)

The blanket assertion, based on by qualified comments, that I am not a true 
believer in theosophy (referring to one of your previous letters) is a gross 
misinterpretation of my negative comments or doubts -- which referred to 
particular cases of witnessed and reported phenomena -- that to me has little 
credibility. What you believe about it is strictly your own choice, and has nothing 
to do with the phenomena itself which could be any kind of staged trick or 
actual manipulation of matter by one process or another -- including light in the 
case of a hologram, or if a strictly superficial form of precipitated 
particles that, like a movie set wall, or an empty egg shell, has nothing within or 
behind it. 

So, in the case of the cup and saucer, I'm willing to accept that a real cup 
and saucer was found buried in the ground, but, until proven otherwise (by a 
direct demonstration of a similar manifestation) doubt that it was projected 
there by HPB using occult methods of disassociation, teleportation and 
reallocation of material particles, etc... Nothing that you or HPB might say to the 
contrary notwithstanding. 

As I intimated in a previous post, I don't have to apologize to anyone for 
not believing anything I read or hear about from other people -- whether they 
have direct witnessed knowledge or not -- unless I've also experienced the same 
phenomena myself. Again, this is not to say that I disbelieve in the actual 
occult ability to produce such phenomena under the proper conditions and 
circumstances.

In any event, methinks you take HPB and your personal interpretations of her 
pontifications far too seriously. I think, if she saw how you harangue people 
who disagree with your view of theosophy as well as worship her absolute 
sainthood and hang on her every word as being literal truth, she would get just as 
much a kick out of pulling your chain as I do. :-) 

Does that now make me not such a theosophical "fundamentalist" as some might 
have thought, previously, that I was? Although I'm still a staunch ULT 
booster, and think that both HPB and WQJ, fun loving mavericks that they were (or at 
least she was), are birds of my own feathers. </:-)> As for their occult 
metaphysical teaching, I believe entirely in its validity -- but only as I read 
about it directly between their lines and around their words with my third eye, 
and test it with my intuition tempered by my reason. 

(More notes below in your letter.)


In a message dated 06/27/04 2:40:13 PM, danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com writes:

>Leon's original contention is as follows:
>
>
>
>==================================================
>
>It may be possible to
>
>bend light by the powers of mind and will, and
>
>project a visualized image of an object to appear
>
>as a hologram -- which could be taken for the
>
>real thing. I seriously doubt that anyone,
>
>including those on the level of a Master
>
>occultist, could actually manifest a physical
>
>cup that someone can drink out of, or
>
>dematerialize such a cup and re-materialize
>
>it at a remote location....
>
>
>
>If you carefully read "all" the writings of
>
>HPB (as I have) you will find that she has consistently
>
>denied such possibilities....

Maybe I should substitute "studied intuitively between the lines and around 
the words" for "carefully read" And add after "possibilities...." -- "in 
certain cases"

>=================================================
>
>
>
>Instead of a cup, what about a note or a piece of
>
>plaster???????

Maybe. All depends on what kind of note, what it's made of, and what kind of 
plaster and who found it, how it was delivered, etc. And, it would also 
depend on if I believed the story if I was told all about it in scientifically 
verifiable detail that I could personally reproduce and witness for myself. As I 
said before, I do not believe everything that anyone tells me about what they 
have witnessed -- just because they say it and set themselves forth as some 
sort of authority.

>Below is another case that refutes
>
>Leon's contention unless he wants to
>
>side with Bart and say all of this was
>
>a fraud.

I wish you would talk to me directly and stop referring to me in the third 
person as if you were making a speech or posting a manifesto. :-) There's no 
question about my siding with anyone -- since I always think for myself and base 
my conclusions upon what I know to be reality in the light of fundamental 
principles coupled with intuitive knowledge that is consistent with reason. 

>In this case we have a note from Master Morya
>
>to Sinnett. According to the occult theory,
>
>this was materialized. The note is now in
>
>the British Museum, so it must be a pretty
>
>permanent "hologram"! See facsimile of this
>
>note in the first URL below.

What occult theory? Prove it wasn't forged or delivered by hand, or 
reproduce it in front of my eyes, and maybe I'll believe it might have been 
manifested by occult means. Although I also can't say that it wasn't, I don't have to 
believe it just because you or anyone else says it was so. 

>Furthemore, we have a piece of plaster which
>
>apparently was dematerialized in Bombay and
>
>rematerialized in Allahabad. Blavatsky was
>
>in Bombay and Sinett was at his home in
>
>Allahabad.

We have nothing but what you have heard second hand. That's no reason to 
believe it actually happened that way, or was just another cooked up or 
misconstrued story.

>No doubt, Bart sees a fraud here but I am
>
>presently dealing ONLY with Leon's contention.

My contention doesn't affirm or deny the occurrence happened as the alleged 
witnesses said it did -- but simply to keep an open mind with respect to all 
possibilities and probabilities, based on my own direct knowledge and experience 
of occult metaphysical, psychical, and physical processes.

>See the Master's note at:
>
>"A Note from Mahatma Morya to A.P. Sinnett"
>
>http://blavatskyarchives.com/Mahmorya5.htm
>
>http://theosophy.info/Mahmorya5.htm

What kind of proof of anything is that? 

>And the narrative of the phenomenon is found at:
>
>
>
>"The Piece of Plaster Plaque Phenomenon"
>
>http://blavatskyarchives.com/sinnettdeposition.htm#plaster
>
>http://theosophy.info/sinnettdeposition.htm#plaster

Interesting... But, so what? If I didn't already know from a metaphysical 
and scientific point of view, as well as personal experience, that such 
phenomena is possible, this alone wouldn't convince me of the reality of this 
occurrence as a true occult phenomena. 

>Concerning the note from Mahatma M. found in a telegram,
>
>CONSIDER also Master K.H.'s words when he writes about the 
>
>"process used by us when we write inside your closed letters and 
>
>uncut pages of books and pamphlets in transit." p. 263 in first 
>
>three editions of THE MAHATMA LETTERS.

Even though I have had a number of out of body experiences myself, including 
an after death experience, as well as studied the metaphysical science from a 
spiritual and physical standpoint that make such things possible and even 
probable. I still cannot unequivocably accept any of the above as sufficient 
evidence to prove the occurance of the specific phenomena discussed, or the method 
used if such phenomena did occur. But, that doesn't stop you or anyone else 
from believing what you will about it.

Leon


>Daniel Caldwell
>
>http://hpb.cc
>
>http://theosophy.info
>
>