Theos-Talk Archives (September 2004 Message tt00348)

Here's an interesting quote from WQJ on this topic it was quite
interesting I thought:

"Student. - When a clairvoyant, as a man did here a year ago, tells me
that "he sees a strong band of spirits about me," and among them an
old man who says he is a certain eminent character, what does he
really see? Empty and senseless shells? If so, what brought them
there? Or elementals which have got their form from my mind or his?

Sage. - Shells, I think, and thoughts, and old astral pictures. If for
instance, you once saw that eminent person and conceived great respect
or fear for him, so that his image was graven in your astral sphere in
deeper lines than other images, it would be seen for your whole life
by seers, who, if untrained - as they all are here - could not tell
whether it was an image or reality; and then each sight of it is a
revivification of the image.

Besides, not all would see the same thing. Fall down, for instance,
and hurt your body, and that will bring up all similar events and old
forgotten things before any seer's eye.

The whole astral world is a mass of illusion; people see into it, and
then, through the novelty of the thing and the exclusiveness of the
power, they are bewildered into thinking they actually see true
things, whereas they have only removed one thin crust of dirt."

http://www.blavatsky.net/theosophy/judge/articles/elementals-and-elementaries.htm


Perry

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Eldon B Tucker <eldon@t...> wrote:
> At 06:33 AM 9/10/2004, you wrote:
> 
> >Is not reading thought forms generated by someone is reading someone's
> >thought? If that be the case, is it not an invasion of privacy
unless the
> >person who generated the thought gives permission? Did HPB comment
on this
> >issue in any of her writings?
> >
> >Anyone cares to comment?
> >
> >mkr
> 
> Since you're inviting comments, I'll throw out a few ideas that
occur to me 
> in reading your question. It would be interesting to see what others
think too.
> 
> I'd say that if you're just reading the ideas that someone has put
down on 
> paper, you're just reinforcing those ideas in the thought atmosphere
of the 
> earth, making them easier for others to think. A particular set of
ideas 
> are strengthened as a large number of people think them, until they
take on 
> archetypal qualities. At that point -- who knows? -- perhaps some being 
> could embody itself by giving sentience to that collective image.
> 
> I don't think that you would be building a personal relationship
with the 
> author of the words that you read, unless there was a two-way
connection 
> between you and the other that already existed. Then your reading
the words 
> would take you, in your mind's eye, to that person based upon the
strength 
> of the bond you have to him or her and how much those words carry
his or 
> her particular swabhava or personal qualities.
> 
> -- Eldon