Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt01516)

I am not psychic therefore I am unfamiliar with the methods you mention.  J=
ohn Edwards appears to have the same technique as you do, and he refers to =
himself as a Medium - or an intermediary between the physical and astral wo=
rlds.  Theosophy teaches us that this road leads nowhere at best and into b=
lack magic at worst.  That it is not fair on the departed soul to disturb t=
heir time in Kama Loka or Devachan. You in fact may be in contact with eith=
er astral shells (souls that have departed from kamaloka to devachan, and j=
ust as the physical body has a decaying process, so does the astral body.  =
However, the difference being that the astral shell maintains a memory of i=
ts past life and it's surroundings.

It seems that Channelling involves some other sort of entity, as they appea=
r to comment on future events through the use, I imagine, of the Akashic Re=
cords. Whereas, your average disembodies soul would not have access to this=
.

What you appear to be saying is that you do not need to go into a trance st=
ate as it seemed to be the case 100 years ago when HPB spoke of Mediums, Se=
ances, etc.  I would love to hear more on your ability to dialogue with tho=
se departed.    Do you have a spirit guide?  And if so, what exactly is a s=
pirit guide?
Like Marie wrote, we were concerned that you might be opening up yourself t=
o powers as yet understood by yourself. That's all.
Cass



Vincent <vblaz2004@sbcglobal.net> wrote: Cass-

You wrote:

"No offence meant Vincent, but as an Idealist you are trying to make=20
the theory fit your beliefs on the subject, viz reconciling=20
christianity with spiritualism."

What specific theory of mine are you referring to?  Would you please=20
quote my exact statement?  I've presented many theories.

And how are you defining 'spiritualism' as you are using the word?=20=20
Do you actually mean to say 'spiritism' instead?  'Spiritualism' is=20
practicing 'spirituality', whereas 'spiritism' is interacting with=20
spirits'.  In what way do you see either one of these as being in=20
conflict with Christianity?

"Someone wisely said you cannot be beholding to two masters."

Here are the biblical quotations of Jesus that you are referring to,=20
as pulled from the NAS95 translation:=20=20

 Mt 6:24 "No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the=20
one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the=20
other. You cannot serve God and wealth.
=20
 Lu 16:13 "No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate=20
the one and love the other, or else he will be devoted to one and=20
despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth."=20

Contrary to the standard Christian interpretation, you are pulling=20
the verses out of context, and misapplying the original text.  The=20
verses specifically refer to love towards Christ versus the love of=20
wealth.  They do not refer to a conflict between Christianity and=20
spiritualism the way that you refer.  You are projecting an imagery=20
onto the text that wasn't intended by the authors, hence you are=20
misinterpreting the biblical texts.

"Would suggest you read IU2, page 117 in relation to Socrates, under=20
the heading "The Visions of seers not provoked by drugs in regard to=20
your trance states."

What is the IU2? The texts that you've provided are fragmented.=20=20
Were they somehow damaged?  The paragraphs are curiously split in=20
odd places.

I might also reference that I do not, nor have I ever, practiced=20
mediumship.  Spirits do not enter into me and speak through me,=20
because I do not allow them any such opportunity.  They may sit=20
beside me, wherein I percieve their presence, and we may dialogue=20
back and forth together, sometimes agreeing and sometimes not, but I=20
do not channel them, or allow them dominion over my psychological=20
processes.

I simply treat them as I would anyone that I meet at the grocery=20
store, interacting with them at times, but not handing my soul over=20
to them, either consciously or subconsciously.  I have strict=20
psychic shields always in place, and boundaries are kept, so that no=20
telepathic links are established.  They have their space and I have=20
mine.

Whereas, your fragmented text provision seems to be talking more=20
about mediums channeling spirits, which I do not practice.  Do you=20
understand the difference between the two modes of operation?  How=20
are you interpreting the text that you've provided for me, and how=20
are you specifically applying it to me?  If you believe that this=20
text is somehow applicable to my personal experience, then in what=20
specific way, insofar as I do not channel spirits as a medium?

Vince

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Cass Silva  wrote:
>
> No offence meant Vincent, but as an Idealist you are trying to=20
make the theory fit your beliefs on the subject, viz reconciling=20
christianity with spiritualism.  Someone wisely said you cannot be=20
beholding to two masters.
>=20
> Would suggest you read IU2, page 117 in relation to Socrates,=20
under the heading "The Visions of seers not provoked by drugs in=20
regard to your trance states.
> Cass
>=20
>   The hierophants and some Brahmans are accused of having=20
administered to their epoptai strong drinks or an=C3=A6sthetics to=20
produce visions which shall be taken by the latter as realities.=20=20
They did and do use sacred beverages which, like the Soma-drink,=20
possess the faculty of freeing the astral form from the bonds of=20
matter; but in those visions there is as little to be attributed to=20
hallucination as in the glimpses which the scientist, by the help of=20
his optical instrument, gets into the microscopic world.  A man=20
cannot perceive, touch, and converse with pure spirit through any of=20
his bodily senses. Only spirit alone can talk to and see spirit; and=20
even our astral soul, the Doppelg=C3=A4nger, is too gross, too much=20
tainted yet with earthly matter to trust entirely to its perceptions=20
and insinuations.
>   How dangerous may often become untrained mediumship, and how=20
thoroughly it was understood and provided against by the ancient=20
sages, is perfectly exemplified in the case of Socrates.  The old=20
Grecian philosopher was a =E2=80=9Cmedium=E2=80=9D; hence, he had never bee=
n=20
initiated into the Mysteries; for such was the rigorous law. But he=20
had his =E2=80=9Cfamiliar spirit=E2=80=9D as they call it, his daimonion; a=
nd=20
this invisible counsellor became the cause of his death.  It is=20
generally believed that if he was not initiated into the Mysteries=20
it was because he himself neglected to become so.  But the Secret=20
Records teach us that it was because he could not be admitted to=20
participate in the sacred rites, and precisely, as we state, on=20
account of his mediumship.  There was a law against the admission=20
not only of such as were convicted of deliberate witchcraft* but even
>=20=20=20
=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=
=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=
=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=
=EF=BF=BD"
=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=
=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=
=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=
=EF=BF=BD"
=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=
=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=
=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=
=EF=BF=BD"
=EF=BF=BD"
>   * We really think that the word =E2=80=9Cwitchcraft=E2=80=9D ought once=
 for=20
all to be understood in the sense which properly belongs to it.=20=20
Witchcraft may be either conscious or unconscious.  Certain wicked=20
and dangerous results may be obtained through the mesmeric powers of=20
a so-called sorcerer who misuses his potential fluid; or again they=20
may be achieved through an easy access of malicious tricky =E2=80=9Cspirit=
=20
(so much the worse if
>=20=20=20=20
>=20=20=20=20
>=20=20=20=20
>   118                                                           =
=20
ISIS UNVEILED.
>=20=20=20=20
>=20=20=20=20
>   of those who were known to have =E2=80=9Ca familiar spirit.=E2=80=9D  T=
he=20
law was just and logical, because a genuine medium is more or less=20
irresponsible; and the eccentricities of Socrates are thus accounted=20
for in some degree.  A medium must be passive; and if a firm=20
believer in his =E2=80=9Cspirit-guide=E2=80=9D he will allow himself to be =
ruled=20
by the latter, not by the rules of the sanctuary.  A medium of olden=20
times, like the modern =E2=80=9Cmedium=E2=80=9D was subject to be entranced=
 at=20
the will and pleasure of the =E2=80=9Cpower=E2=80=9D which controlled him;=
=20
therefore, he could not well have been entrusted with the awful=20
secrets of the final initiation, =E2=80=9Cnever to be revealed under the=20
penalty of death.=E2=80=9D  The old sage, in unguarded moments of=20
=E2=80=9Cspiritual inspiration,=E2=80=9D revealed that which he had never=20
learned; and was therefore put to death as an atheist.
>   How then, with such an instance as that of Socrates, in relation=20
to the visions and spiritual wonders at the epoptai, of the Inner=20
Temple, can any one assert that these seers, theurgists, and=20
thaumaturgists were all =E2=80=9Cspirit-mediums=E2=80=9D?  Neither Pythagor=
as,=20
Plato, nor any of the later more important Neo-platonists; neither=20
Iamblichus, Longinus, Proclus, nor Apollonius of Tyana, were ever=20
mediums; for in such case they would not have been admitted to the=20
Mysteries at all.  As Taylor proves =EF=BF=BD" =E2=80=9CThis assertion of d=
ivine=20
visions in the Mysteries is clearly confirmed by Plotinus.  And in=20
short, that magical evocation formed a part of the sacerdotal office=20
in them, and that this was universally believed by all antiquity=20
long before the era of the later Platonists,=E2=80=9D shows that apart=20
from natural =E2=80=9Cmediumship,=E2=80=9D there has existed, from the begi=
nning=20
of time, a mysterious science, discussed by many, but known only to=20
a few
>   The use of it is a longing toward our only true and real home=20
=EF=BF=BD" the after-life, and a desire to cling more closely to our parent=
=20
spirit; abuse of it is sorcery, witchcraft, black magic.  Between=20
the two is placed natural =E2=80=9Cmediumship=E2=80=9D; a soul clothed with=
=20
imperfect matter, a ready agent for either the one or the other, and=20
utterly dependent on its surroundings of life, constitutional=20
heredity =EF=BF=BD" physical as well as mental =EF=BF=BD" and on the nature=
 of the=20
=E2=80=9Cspirits=E2=80=9D it attracts around itself.  A blessing or a curse=
, as=20
fate will have it, unless the medium is purified of earthly dross.
>   The reason why in every age so little has been generally known=20
of the mysteries of initiation, is twofold.  The first has already=20
been explained by more than one author, and lies in the terrible=20
penalty following the least indiscretion.  The second, is the=20
superhuman difficulties and even dangers which the daring candidate=20
of old had to encounter, and either conquer, or die in the attempt,=20
when, what is still worse, he did not lose his
>=20=20=20
=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=
=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=
=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=
=EF=BF=BD"
=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=
=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=
=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=
=EF=BF=BD"
=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=
=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=
=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=EF=BF=BD"=
=EF=BF=BD"
=EF=BF=BD"
>   human) to the atmosphere surrounding a medium.  How many=20
thousands of such irresponsible innocent victims have met infamous=20
deaths through the tricks of those Elementaries!
>=20=20=20=20
>=20=20=20=20
>=20=20=20=20
>=20=20=20=20
>=20=20=20
>=20
> Vincent  wrote: Jerry-
>=20
> You wrote:
>=20
> "I think the Theosophical Society began to fail in 1885, and the=20
> first signs of it beginning to depart from the ideal of it's=20
> founders began in the fall of 1890."
>=20
> And aside from these failures which you attribute to the=20
> Theosophical Society, in what ways do you think they have still=20
been=20
> subsequently successful today?
>=20
> "My wife and I recently attended a weekend seminar at Krotona.  We=20
> had a good time.  Got to see old friends and walked around the=20
> grounds remembering the many people who once live there are are=20
now=20
> gone.  I am a life member of the TS.  I still work with the TS=20
> whenever they ask my assistance.  For instance, I was helping the=20
> former librarian at Olcott on a project to complete sets of rare=20
> journals to be microfilmed at the American Theological Library=20
> Association.  Anything I can to to help the movement, I still=20
gladly=20
> do."
>=20
> What things still appeal to you about the Theosophical Society=20
today?
>=20
> "You must understand that I am an idealist.  Self interested=20
> politics are expected in for profit corporations.  After all,=20
their=20
> sole purpose for their existence is to make money in any way they=20
> can. The interests of the CEO's is understandably to make sure=20
that=20
> they get a nice piece of that pie for themselves."
>=20
> I believe that not-for-profit corporations are just as money-
> centered as for-profit corporations.  They both require money to=20
> operate, and are permeated with organizational politics at their=20
> highest ranks.  They just obtain their money in different ways.
>=20
> "Religious, philosophical and educational organizations have very=20
> different agendas. Their purpose is to tend to the spiritual and=20
> intellectual needs of the people. There is no place for self=20
> interest in these organizations, and because it happens anyway=20
does=20
> not make it OK with me."
>=20
> I believe that religious, philosophical and educational=20
> organizations are first and foremost out to make money.  Their=20
> services are strictly delivered at a price.  They may meet=20
spiritual=20
> and intellectual needs, but only for a monetary fee.  Money is=20
> central and donations are key.
>=20
> "I'm sure that you will learn quite a lot there.  You have a=20
valuable
> resource near your door.  You are very lucky."
>=20
> Thank you.  Yes, I feel lucky to have the National headquarters of=20
> the Theosophical Society just 20 minutes away from me.
>=20
> "We have what we have and the Biblical scholars are doing the best=20
> they can with it.  They would just like to have back the 150 or so=20
> texts they know about that were destroyed by the church=20
authorities,=20
> and the unknown more that must have also existed."
>=20
> I suggest that there is such a wealth in the Bible that we=20
currently=20
> retain, that even if we lost another 50% of it today, we'd still=20
> retain more spiritual treasure within it than we could=20
qualitatively=20
> ingest in a lifetime.
>=20
> "How can I answer this question?  They are all historical texts in=20
> the sense that they are old.  So in this meaning, they are all=20
> historically valid.   But as I mentioned earlier, none of these=20
> texts were written as historical accounts of an event."
>=20
> I'm not sure where you get this idea.  I suggest that the gospels=20
> were very much intended as historical texts, even if=20
> evangelistically focused.  Luke attempts to focus on each detail=20
for=20
> accuracy, for example.  Now one may say that the historical=20
methods=20
> of recording and/or verifying information 2000 years ago was not=20
as=20
> precise as it is today, but the gospels are historically-intended=20
> documents nonetheless, even while remaining evangelistic.
>=20
> "The Gospels are written around a series of actions with powerful=20
> cultural connotations which touched upon Greek spirituality and=20
> aroused spiritual responses: the virgin birth; turning water to=20
> wine; healing the Bind man; chasing the demons into the pigs etc.=20=20
> Understanding how the Greeks understood these images requires a=20
> study in Greek religion.  That is why when we started our class in=20
> the Origins of Christianity, be began with a study of Greek, Roman=20
> and Egyptian religion, and preceded these by a three year study of=20
> Judaism."
>=20
> I suggest that the historicity of the gospels and the presence of=20
> Greek cultural overtones are not mutually exclusive.  The two can=20
> exist together.
>=20
> "As for the presumably historical elements in the Gospel=20
scriptures:
> Birth at Bethlehem; flight to Egypt; the 12 apostles; the Jesu=20
Logia;
> the over turning of the money changer's tables; the Sanhedrin=20
trial;=20
> the interview with Pilate; the passion, all are riddled with=20
> historical difficulties."
>=20
> These historical difficulties do not elimate the fact that the=20
> gospels are originally intended as historical documents.  Rather,=20
> you're just not satisfied with their degree of historical accuracy=20
> by today's standards.  Those are two very different scenarios.
>=20
> "I wasn't thinking of drug use.  But yes, I agree, it is very=20
> risky.  I am saying that certain practices which do not involve=20
> drugs, which force open the "doors of perception" as Huxley called=20
> it, can also have bad results."
>=20
> That all depends on how much force you use.  I've personally=20
> experienced that delicate force can have rather good results as=20
well.
>=20
> "You description reminds me of practices carried on by some Indian
> sadhus, and also some Native American practices.  They open the=20
lower
> psychic realms in induce visions etc. but are useless for the
> development of the real spiritual clairvoyance."
>=20
> Yes, some of these practices were used by ancient Indians.  I'm=20
not=20
> certain how you're using the term 'spiritual clairvoyance', but I=20
> nonetheless suggest that higher spirituality is not attained=20
without=20
> first opening up the lower psychic realms for purposes of=20
> cleansing.  In this sense, one must pass through the hells (the=20
> darkness of the psychic subconscious) before entering the heavens=20
> (gaining spiritual enlightenment).
>=20
> This is very similar to the concept that Jesus himself descended=20
> into the hells and subsequently ascended into the heavens.  Or=20
when=20
> he was tempted by the devil in the wilderness prior to his earthly=20
> ministry.
>=20
> If the lower psychic centers are not opened so that they can be=20
> cleansed, we will merely adopt a materialistic pseudo-spirituality=20
> as a result, which is even more dangerous than opening up the=20
lower=20
> psychic centers of our subconscious.
>=20
> Blessings
>=20
> Vince
>=20
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Hejka-Ekins=20=20
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Vince,
> >=20
> > >Do you somehow feel that the Theosophical Society of Wheaton,=20
> where=20
> > >I have recently been attending, has departed from the ideals of=20
> it's=20
> > >founders?=20=20
> > >
> > I think the Theosophical Society began to fail in 1885, and the=20
> first=20
> > signs of it beginning to depart from the ideal of it's founders=20
> began in=20
> > the fall of 1890.=20
> >=20
> > >Do you still personally attend there, or have you=20
> > >altogether ceased?
> > >
> > My wife and I recently attended a weekend seminar at Krotona.=20=20
We=20
> had a=20
> > good time.  Got to see old friends and walked around the grounds=20
> > remembering the many people who once live there are are now=20
gone.=20=20
> I am=20
> > a life member of the TS.  I still work with the TS whenever they=20
> ask my=20
> > assistance.  For instance, I was helping the former librarian at=20
> Olcott=20
> > on a project to complete sets of rare journals to be microfilmed=20
> at the=20
> > American Theological Library Association.  Anything I can to to=20
> help the=20
> > movement, I still gladly do.
> >=20
> > >So you seem to be saying that they've been a bit political to=20
say=20
> > >the least.  But the same could be said of any incorporated=20
> business=20
> > >or religious organization.  Do you feel that they actually did=20
> > >something bad or wrong?
> > >
> > You must understand that I am an idealist.  Self interested=20
> politics are=20
> > expected in for profit corporations.  After all, their sole=20
> purpose for=20
> > their existence is to make money in any way they can. The=20
> interests of=20
> > the CEO's is understandably to make sure that they get a nice=20
> piece of=20
> > that pie for themselves. Religious, philosophical and=20
educational=20
> > organizations have very different agendas. Their purpose is to=20
> tend to=20
> > the spiritual and intellectual needs of the people. There is no=20
> place=20
> > for self interest in these organizations, and because it happens=20
> anyway=20
> > does not make it OK with me.
> >=20
> > >Honestly, I've just been attending some weekly teachings and=20
> > >courses, paying each applicable donation per visit which is=20
> > >necessary to run the meetings.  Perhaps I will learn some=20
things=20
> > >there, and I believe that I have already as well.
> > >
> > I'm sure that you will learn quite a lot there.  You have a=20
> valuable=20
> > resource near your door.  You are very lucky.=20
> >=20
> > >I would suggest that, even if the Bible is so grossly edited as=20
> you=20
> > >assert, we nonetheless have enough of it historically intact to=20
> make=20
> > >useful reading of it.  Granted it may be fragmented, but we=20
still=20
> > >have a reasonable amount to constuctively work with.
> > >
> > We have what we have and the Biblical scholars are doing the=20
best=20
> they=20
> > can with it.  They would just like to have back the 150 or so=20
> texts they=20
> > know about that were destroyed by the church authorities, and=20
the=20
> > unknown more that must have also existed.
> >=20
> > >What portions of the Bible, if any, do you believe remain=20
> > >historically valid?  Is it all bad, or just parts thereof?
> > >
> > How can I answer this question?  They are all historical texts=20
in=20
> the=20
> > sense that they are old.  So in this meaning, they are all=20
> historically=20
> > valid.   But as I mentioned earlier, none of these texts were=20
> written as=20
> > historical accounts of an event.  The Gospels are written around=20
a=20
> > series of actions with powerful cultural connotations which=20
> touched upon=20
> > Greek spirituality and aroused spiritual responses: the virgin=20
> birth;=20
> > turning water to wine; healing the Bind man; chasing the demons=20
> into the=20
> > pigs etc.  Understanding how the Greeks understood these images=20
> requires=20
> > a study in Greek religion.  That is why when we started our=20
class=20
> in the=20
> > Origins of Christianity, be began with a study of Greek, Roman=20
and=20
> > Egyptian religion, and preceded these by a three year study of=20
> Judaism.
> >=20
> > As for the presumably historical elements in the Gospel=20
> scriptures:=20
> > Birth at Bethlehem; flight to Egypt; the 12 apostles; the Jesu=20
> Logia;=20
> > the over turning of the money changer's tables; the Sanhedrin=20

=3D=3D=3D message truncated =3D=3D=3D

=09=09
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ coun=
tries) for 2=A2/min or less.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]