The View of the Theosophists
Sir,—In his statement, published in your issue of December 7th, Col. Olcott invites comment upon the views expressed. Many of these, I think, are in harmony with the facts already mastered, and the truths already realised, by thinkers who are men of science and also Spiritualists. But in defining the alleged individualities termed “Elementals” as “the forces of nature,” “the force of the wind, the fire, the flood,” the Theosophy of Col. Olcott severs itself from all possible connection with modern science, and places itself in antagonism to it on one of its broadest fields of exact knowledge. Is this an inadvertence, a chance flaw in the system, to be remedied by further thought? Or does this Theosophy claim kindred not with the physics of Newton, but with those of Paracelsus; not with chemistry, but with alchemy; not with astronomy, but with astrology—
“Ars sine artem, cujus principium mendicere”?
What Col. Olcott calls the “Elementals,” he calls also the forces of nature,” modern science calls modes of energy, and equates to m.h = m.v2/2f “The perfect initiate has absolute dominion over those errant, unthinking, soulless forces of nature, and with their help can do what common men call miracle. Of themselves they have no more desire to harm than to help us, and are no more responsible for their actions than the wind that blows, the fire that burns, the flood that devastates. They are the force of the wind, the fire, the flood. They are the creatures of immutable law, and man, in employing them, but uses them in obedience to the same, aiding nature.” Is not this figurative language, in which the initiate in science might convey the half-truths which alone could be realised by men to whom ineradicable mythologies and superstitions have personified the agencies of nature? Or is it supposed we can admitt in these days, that the potential energy stored up, for instance, in gunpowder is in reality an “elemental;” that the kinetic energy of the cannon-ball, into which the former is converted, is another individuality of similar nature; and that the heat generated when the ball strikes the target has a distinct personality? If so, Theosophy is not in advance of, but considerably behind, the times.
Brixton.
Sir,—Colonel Olcott deserves the thanks of all intelligent men for his concise and lucid statement of the views of the Theosophists, and I shall be glad when all Spiritualists can say in as few words what the foundation of their belief is.
But there are points in his letter which I should like to make a few comments upon.
My remarks will be based upon experience gained through constant sittings with one of the best trance mediums in this country, whom I know to be a pure-minded person, and intellectually well-developed; I also am an inspirational medium.
First, as to duality at birth, and perhaps until the sixth or seventh year. I had three children who passed away at the respective ages of two, four, and six years. These have all been seen, and described by the medium while in her normal state (she never having seen them in earth-life); their names were given, and they were described standing in the room in full daylight, both as they were in earth-life, and as they are now, grown; they said that they would love me more and more as they grew and grew; she also described a sister who passed away when I was a child.
As to the annihilation of the depraved, I have known persons come back, who I knew to be very depraved on earth, and to state, like rational men, that they were getting on and learning the reason and object of their existence. These statements have been afterwards confirmed by glorious beings who come often, and who have proved by their mastery of the laws which are governing the universe, that they are worthy of being believed.
If the seers of the East have gained such mastery of the secrets of nature, why is the East sunk in moral and physical degradation? If these men have sounded the depths of nature, why have they not found out that it is their duty to work for the elevation of the human family?
Had the Theosophists thoroughly comprehended the nature of the soul and spirit, and its relation to the body, they would have known that if the soul once left the body it could not return. The spirit can leave, but if the soul once leaves, it leaves for ever. Therefore, the assumption that form manifestations are caused by the soul leaving the body, is an unreasonable one.
Then he says, “We affirm that the indiscriminate attainment of immortality would be contrary to the analysis of nature, and repugnant to the idea of strict justice.” The survival of the fittest is the result of force, not power, and power is the result of mind, not of physical force. Mind has latent powers which can be brought out by culture, and use, and strengthened thereby, but force is exhausted by being employed. The power of mind to discriminate truth from error, and show the individual his duty and position in the universe is not brought out, through pre-natal and subsequent conditions and surroundings, over which the person had no control; also through want of education, and during the whole of his youth being surrounded by vice and ignorance, and the necessity of every-day working at an exhaustive and incongenial employment for physical sustenance; also through being crushed by tyrants, and driven to violence and crime by injustice. Would it be “justice” if such a man lost his immortality? I answer “No,” and the angels cry, “No.”
One might be led to infer by Col. Olcott’s remarks that we are ignorant of the laws of spirit intercourse, but this is not so. I have not written on Spiritualism before; but from the first moment that I became acquainted with the subject I have sought by careful observation to master the details, for I believe in nothing which I cannot demonstrate as plainly as I can a question in botany, or mesmerism, or phrenology, which sciences I have long worked at. As a consequence, electricity and zoology, and the other sciences have come under my observation, the whole being in affinity, as is all truth.
18, Overston-road, Hammersmith, W., Dec. 10, 1877.
A Strange “Coincidence”
...
<Untitled> (In Mr. Massey's excellent comments)
Sir,—In Mr. Massey’s excellent comments on Mr. Simmons’s no lees excellent observations with regard to psychographic phenomena, there are one or two points on which I will venture a few remarks.
Mr. Massey is of opinion that little difficulty need be felt in accepting the view that the pencil is moved by the duplicated hand of the medium. The fact that the crumb of pencil generally used has often been seen falling from the vertical position employed in writing, just as the slate has been drawn from under the table, would point to the conclusion that the writing agency had grasped and used the pencil <... continues on page 4-121 >
Editor's notes
- ↑ The View of the Theosophists by Croucher,J., London Spiritualist, No. 278, December 21, 1877, p. 297
- ↑ A Strange “Coincidence” by Blavatsky H.P., Banner of Light, Boston, Saturday, January 5, 1878
- ↑ image by unknown author
- ↑ In Mr. Massey's excellent comments by Kislingbury, Emily, London Spiritualist, No. 280, January 4, 1878, pp. 8-9
London Spiritualist, No. 278, December 21, 1877, p. 297
London Spiritualist, No. 280, January 4, 1878, pp. 8-9