theos-talk.com

[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX]

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

to Pedro & Others: Re: endless series of Seers

Sep 13, 2004 08:10 PM
by Daniel H. Caldwell


Pedro and others:

I invite you to read carefully the following extract
from The Secret Doctrine:

"The Secret Doctrine is the accumulated Wisdom of the Ages, and its 
cosmogony alone is the most stupendous and elaborate system: e.g., 
even in the exotericism of the Puranas. But such is the mysterious 
power of Occult symbolism, that the facts which have actually 
occupied countless generations of initiated seers and prophets to 
marshal, to set down and explain, in the bewildering series of 
evolutionary progress, are all recorded on a few pages of geometrical 
signs and glyphs. The flashing gaze of those seers has penetrated 
into the very kernel of matter, and recorded the soul of things 
there, where an ordinary profane, however learned, would have 
perceived but the external work of form. But modern science believes 
not in the "soul of things," and hence will reject the whole system 
of ancient cosmogony. It is useless to say that the system in 
question is no fancy of one or several isolated individuals. That it 
is the uninterrupted record covering thousands of generations of 
Seers whose respective experiences were made to test and to verify 
the traditions passed orally by one early race to another, of the 
teachings of higher and exalted beings, who watched over the 
childhood of Humanity. That for long ages, the "Wise Men" of the 
Fifth Race, of the stock saved and rescued from the last cataclysm 
and shifting of continents, had passed their lives in learning, not 
teaching. How did they do so? It is answered: by checking, testing, 
and verifying in every department of nature the traditions of old by 
the independent visions of great adepts; i.e., men who have developed 
and perfected their physical, mental, psychic, and spiritual 
organisations to the utmost possible degree. No vision of one adept 
was accepted till it was checked and confirmed by the visions -- so 
obtained as to stand as independent evidence -- of other adepts, and 
by centuries of experiences." 

Notice in particular the following:

"....independent visions of great adepts; i.e., men who have 
developed and perfected their physical, mental, psychic, and 
spiritual organisations to the utmost possible degree."

Were Hodson, Bendit and Kunz "great adepts"?

Had they "developed and perfected their physical, mental, psychic, 
and spiritual organisations to the utmost possible degree"?

They may have been clairvoyants but were they adepts?

There is a recurring theme throughout all of HPB's writings
for the 16 or 17 years of her public career as well as in
the Mahatma Letters about Adepts and clairvoyants and about
the great difference between the two.

I am not suggesting that one should ignore what Hodson,
Bendit and Kunz have written. Their writings should be
studied and carefully considered. I am not suggesting that
one should pooh-pooh their observations. 

I personally know several persons who can see auras, etc. etc.
They have some degree of clairvoyance, no doubt. But are the
persons I know "adepts"?

Probably not, I would hesitate to answer.  

Admittedly, all of the above questions are hard to answer.
I would not want to pretend I know the answers. But I think
at least in theory, we should be able to see the difference
between what HPB and the Mahatmas mean by "adeptship" and
the group of individuals that we could call clairvoyants.

In the case of Mrs. Laura Holloway, we have the distinct
statement by KH:

"She is an excellent but quite undeveloped clairvoyante."

Moving on.

Writing about Emmanuel Swedenborg, "the great Swedish seer and 
mystic," Mme. Blavatsky comments that Swedenborg "claimed to pass at 
will into that state when the Inner Self frees itself entirely from 
every physical sense, and lives and breathes in a world where every 
secret of Nature is an open book to the Soul-eye." "The Secret 
Doctrine," Vol. III, 1897, p. 425

But she adds: 

"Unless one obtains exact information and the right method, one's 
visions, however correct and true in Soul-life, will ever fail to get 
photographed in our human memory, and certain cells of the brain are 
sure to play havoc with our remembrances."

Elsewhere, Madame Blavatsky states that Swedenborg's "clairvoyant 
powers . . . were very remarkable; but they did not go beyond this 
plane of matter; all that he says of subjective worlds and spiritual 
beings is evidently far more the outcome of his exuberant fancy, than 
of his spiritual insight. . . ." "The Theosophical Glossary," entry 
on Swedenborg.

H.P. Blavatsky gives more information on this topic in her E.S. 
Instruction No. I:

"Yet even a clairvoyant possessed of such faculties, if not an Adept, 
no matter how honest and sincere he may be, will through his 
ignorance of the truths of Occult Science, be led by the visions he 
sees in the Astral Light only to mistake for God or Angels the 
denizens of those spheres of which he may occasionally catch a 
glimpse, as witness Swedenborg and others." "The Secret Doctrine," 
Vol. III, 1897, p. 448.

And in The Secret Doctrine, HPB also writes:

"But this is the limit beyond which the ordinary faculties of man 
cannot carry him. Many are the romances and tales, some purely 
fanciful, others bristling with scientific knowledge, which have 
attempted to imagine and describe life on other globes. But one and 
all, they give but some distorted copy of the drama of life around 
us. . . . we always find that at bottom the new world is but the one 
we ourselves live in. So strong is this tendency that even great 
natural, though non-initiated seers, when untrained, fall a victim to 
it; witness Swedenborg, who goes so far as to dress the inhabitants 
of Mercury, whom he meets with in the spirit-world, in clothes such 
as are worn in Europe."

Compare this last statement with what C.W. Leadbeater
wrote about life on Mars. See:

http://blavatskyarchives.com/leadbeatermars.htm

The theme I referred to earlier in my posting is
to be found in the following from Master Morya:

"There is one general law of vision (physical and mental or 
spiritual) but there is a qualifying special law proving that all 
vision must be determined by the quality or grade of man's spirit and 
soul, and also by the ability to translate diverse qualities of waves 
of astral light into consciousness. There is but one general law of 
life, but innumerable laws qualify and determine the myriads of forms 
perceived and of sounds heard. There are those who are willingly and 
others who are unwillingly  blind. Mediums belong to the former, 
sensitives to the latter. Unless regularly initiated and trained
 concerning the spiritual insight of things and the supposed 
revelations made unto man in all ages from Socrates down to 
Swedenborg ... .  no self-tutored seer or clairaudient ever saw
or heard quite correctly." 

And KH writes: 

"The world of force is the world of Occultism and the only one 
whither the highest initiate goes to probe the secrets of being. 
Hence no-one but such an initiate can know anything of these secrets. 
Guided by his Guru the chela first discovers this world, then its 
laws ..."

See also my previous RELATED posting which can be found at:

Shearman's reference to "psychics quite unconnected with the Society."
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/18721

And compare what HPB says about life on other planets
quoted at:
http://blavatskyarchives.com/leadbeatermars.htm

AND HPB's quote as given by Perry at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/18754

So I ask:

Should we include Hodson, Kunz, Bendit and Leadbeater
among the "great adepts; i.e., men who have developed and perfected 
their physical, mental, psychic, and spiritual organisations to the 
utmost possible degree"?

Furthermore, would truly "great adepts" make the kind
of statements as those quoted in the following two posts:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/18427

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/18428

A QUESTION FOR PEDRO:

A Misleading Mayavic Ideation & Deluding Influences
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/18520

I don't believe you ever made any comments on the 
material quoted in the following posting:

A Misleading Mayavic Ideation & Deluding Influences
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/18520

If you accept this KH letter as genuine (and it is not
clear to me how you view it), it is clear that Mrs. Besant
suffered from at least one "misleading mayavic ideation" and from 
"deluding influences." And one could probably also include
Mr. Leadbeater in this estimation.

Daniel 
http://hpb.cc









 





--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "prmoliveira" <prmoliveira@y...> 
wrote:
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Perry Coles" <perrycoles@y...> 
> wrote:
> 
> > Who checked and verified there visions and pronouncements?
> 
> 
> Regarding the "etheric double", for example, at least three 
> different clairvoyants, independently. See quotes:
> 
> 
> "The human etheric double interpenetrates the physical body, 
> reproduces its shape (hence the name) and extends about 1/16 of an 
> inch beyond the skin. It is lavender grey in colour with currents 
of 
> differently coloured *pranas* flowing through it, orange yellow 
> predominating, and has seven flower-shaped vortices about 4 inches 
> in diameter upon its surface, with "stalks" connecting some of them 
> to the spinal cord and others to bodily glands. Though built of 
> substance called ether which is finer than matter in the gaseous 
> condition, it is still physical. It can therefore become densified 
> so that it reflects light as in psychic photographs, and it is 
> visible and even tangible.
> 
> In advance, it has three functions: Reservoir and conveyor of vital 
> energy or *prana*: Connecting link between the physical and the 
> superphysical: Matrix or etheric mould for the growth of the body, 
> and the receipt of *karmic* modifications, from the moment of 
> conception."
> 
> (Geoffrey Hodson in "Basic Theosophy" (1981), chapter III)
> 
> 
> 
> "I feel strongly that in a study of this kind it is necessary to 
say 
> what I personally mean by clairvoyance. There is so much 
> misunderstanding attached to extrasensory perception which is, 
after 
> all, merely a means and not an end.
> 
> In the physical world one can learn much by observation, but it 
does 
> not at all follow that what is observed is understood. In using the 
> faculty of clairvoyance one still uses external observation, and 
> sees much that is not necessarily deciphered accurately. All such 
> vision is personal, and not to be confused with spiritual 
> illumination. The evidence of the physical senses can never be 
> accepted as proof of ultimate reality. Neither can that of psychic 
> sense, for the latter, like the former, is a useful servant but a 
> dangerous guide.
> 
> All extra-sensory perception has to pass through the mind of the 
> percipient and is therefore biased by its mental images, 
> intellectual interests, and the neutral tone and coloring of that 
> mind. To me the most legitimate use of my capacity is to make such 
> observations as I can, and present these for acceptance or 
rejection 
> in precisely the same way as we present the other ideas in this 
> study. At best they perhaps serve as illustrations of the many 
> subtle things we have tried to convey, at worst the can be regarded 
> as fantasies and thus dismissed. But after thirty years of 
> observation of the human etheric field in diagnostic work for both 
> physical and psychological cases, I can at least state simply that 
> clairvoyant observation has been useful abd acceptable."
> 
> Phoebe D. Bendit in (with Lawrence J. Bendit)
> "The Etheric Body of Man" (Quest Books, 1977,
> first published in 1957 under the title 
> "Man Incarnate".)
> 
> 
> 
> "Regarded as energies, feelings and thoughts are related to one 
> another in a way that is analogous to the relationship between 
sound 
> and light. At one end of the spectrum of consciousness lies the 
> field most closely related to the the physical body. It is known as 
> etheric, and its characterisitc form of energy is what is called 
> *prana* in Indian thought -- that is, life energy or vitality. All 
> living things are nourished and sustained by this energy. In 
> diagnosing illness, the color and radiance of an individual's 
pranic 
> flow are important indicators to me of the state of health. The 
> reason why the emotions have such an impact upon our health is 
> because the etheric is very closely linked with the emotional 
field; 
> there is a constant interplay between the two types of energy.
> 
> Incidentally, this is the most difficult field to study 
> clairvoyantly, because it is the most complex. The etheric is 
really 
> the prototype of the physical body, and it replicates the 
> complexities of our bodily processes. In looking for traces of 
> disease, therefore, one must take note of variations in color, 
> texture, degree and type of motion, and may other factors within 
the 
> etheric. In the practice of healing techniques such as Therapeutic 
> Touch, we work primarily to discover and remove impediments in the 
> flow of etheric energy, while always thinking of the person as a 
> whole."
> 
> Dora Kunz in "The Personal Aura", chapter II
> (Quest Book, 1991)  
>  
>  
> 
> >We have no two beliefs or hypotheses on the same subject.
> 
> 
> What then is the reason for HPB to mention, both in The Key and in 
> the SD, *several* schools of thought concerning the constitution of 
> man (e.g. Vedanta, Kabala, Taraka-Raja Yoga, Esoteric Buddhist, 
> Greek)?
> 
> 
> Pedro




[Back to Top]


Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application