KUTHUMI
When in October 1882, Sinnett sent a letter to Master Kuthumi in which, among other things, he asked:
« What other planets of those known to ordinary science, besides Mercury, belong to our system of worlds? Are the more spiritual planets — A, B & Y, Z — visible bodies in the sky or are all those known to astronomy of the more material sort? »
(ML 23a, p.148)
Kuthumi replied:
« Mars and four other planets of which astronomy knows yet nothing. Neither A, B, nor Y, Z, are known; nor can they be seen through physical means however perfected. »
(ML 23b, p.176)
There I note that Master Kuthumi considered Sinnett's question to be twofold:
1)
The first question was "What other planets, besides Mercury, belong to
our system of worlds, among those known to conventional science?"
And Kuthumi thought that Sinnett was referring to the planets of the solar system and so he replied: [Besides Earth and Mercury there are] "Mars and four other planets about which astronomy still knows nothing."
2)
And the second question was "Are the more spiritual planets —A, B, Y,
and Z— visible bodies in the sky, or are all those known to astronomy of a
more material nature?"
And Kuthumi considered that Sinnett was referring to the subtlest globes of the planetary chain, and so he replied: "Neither A, nor B, nor Y, nor Z are known; nor can they be seen by physical means, however perfected they may be."
SINNETT
But
unfortunately, Sinnett did not quite understand the answer Kuthumi gave
him, and that is why he believed that Kuthumi had told him that the
terrestrial chain is composed of Earth, Mars, Mercury, plus four subtle
globes.
And that is why, when he wrote his book "Esoteric Buddhism" (1883) where he summarized the teachings given to him by Master Kuthumi, Sinnett declared:
« Besides the earth, which is at the lowest material point, there are only two other worlds of our [planetary] chain which are visible to physical eyes, — the one behind and the one in advance of it.
These two worlds, as a matter of fact, are Mars and Mercury, — Mars being behind and Mercury in advance of us: Mars in a state of entire obscuration now as regards the human life-wave, Mercury just beginning to prepare for its next human period.
The two planets of our chain that are behindMars, and the two that are in advance of Mercury, are not composed of an order of matterwhich telescopes can take cognizance of. Fourout of the seven are thus of an ethereal nature,which people who can only conceive matter inits earthly form will be inclined to call immaterial. But they are not really immaterial at all. They are simply in a finer state of materialitythan the earth, but their finer state does not inany way defeat the uniformity of Nature's de-sign in regard to the methods and stages of their evolution. »
(Chapter 7)
There Sinnett told two complete lies and two half-lies:
1) That Mars and Mercury are part of the terrestrial chain.
But that is false, as I will demonstrate below.
2)
That terrestrial humans first developed on Mars, are currently
developing on Earth, and in the future will develop on Mercury.
But
that is also false, since the Trans-Himalayan Masters explained that
the souls that are currently developing in the human kingdom on Earth,
in the previous cosmic cycle developed in the animal kingdom on the Moon
when this celestial body contained life, and in the next planetary
cycle they will develop in the angelic kingdom, which is no longer a
planetary kingdom but a solar kingdom.
3) That the globes invisible to physical sight are of an ethereal nature.
If
by ethereal he means something subtle, his statement is correct. But in
original Theosophy, ethereal also refers to the fourth state of
physical matter, and in this case, his statement is incorrect. And in
Leadbeater's Neo-Theosophy, ethereal refers to the four higher states of
physical matter, and in this case, his statement is also incorrect.
4) That Mars is currently in a state of complete obscuration with regard to the wave of human life.
But
this statement is incomplete because Master Kuthumi specified that Mars
is currently in a state of dormancy (what Sinnett calls obscuration)
for all life forms, implying that there is currently no life on Mars,
neither on its physical plane nor on its subtle planes. And the same is
currently happening on Mercury as well.
BLAVATSKY
Blavatsky, in her work "The Secret Doctrine I" (1888), corrected the first lie that Sinnett told:
« The erroneous statement that two of the superior Globes of the terrestrial chain were two of our well-known planets:
"Besides the Earth . . . there are only two other worlds of our chain which are visible. . . . Mars and Mercury. . ." (Esoteric Buddhism, p.136, 5th ed.)
This was a great mistake. But the blame for it is to be attached as much to the vagueness and incompleteness of the Master’s answer as to the question of the learner itself, which was equally vague and indefinite.
It was asked: “What planets, of those known to ordinary science, besides Mercury, belong to our system of worlds?”
Now if by “System of Worlds” our terrestrial chain or “string” was intended in the mind of the querist, instead of the “Solar System of Worlds,” as it should have been, then of course the answer was likely to be misunderstood.
For the reply was: “Mars, etc., and four other planets of which astronomy knows nothing. Neither A, B, nor Y, Z are known nor can they be seen through physical means however perfected.”
This is plain: (a) Astronomy as yet knows nothing in reality of the planets, neither the ancient ones, nor those discovered in modern times. (b) No companion planets from A to Z, i.e., no upper globes of any chain in the Solar System, can be seen.
As to Mars, Mercury, and “the four other planets,” they bear a relation to Earth of which no master or high Occultist will ever speak, much less explain the nature.
In this same letter the impossibility is distinctly stated: — . . . “Try to understand that you are putting me questions pertaining to the highest initiation; that I can give you (only) a general view, but that I dare not nor will I enter upon details . . .” wrote one of the Teachers to the author of 'Esoteric Buddhism'.
Let it now be distinctly stated, then, that the theory broached is impossible, with or without the additional evidence furnished by modern Astronomy. Physical Science can supply corroborative, though still very uncertain, evidence, but only as regards heavenly bodies on the same plane of materiality as our objective Universe.
Mars and Mercury, Venus and Jupiter, like every hitherto discovered planet (or those still to be discovered), are all, per se, the representatives on our plane of such chains.
As distinctly stated in one of the numerous letters of Mr. Sinnett’s Teacher, “there are other and innumerable Manvantaric chains of globes which bear intelligent Beings both in and outside our solar system.”
But neither Mars nor Mercury belong to our chain. They are, along with the other planets, septenary Units in the great host of “chains” of our system, and all are as visible as their upper globes are invisible.
If it is still argued that certain expressions in the Teacher’s letters were liable to mislead, the answer comes: — Amen; so it was. The author of 'Esoteric Buddhism' understood it well when he wrote that such are “the traditional modes of teaching . . . by provoking the perplexity” . . . they do, or do not relieve — as the case may be.
At all events, if it is urged that this might have been explained earlier, and the true nature of the planets given out as they now are, the answer comes that:
“It was not found expedient to do so at the time, as it would have opened the way to a series of additional questions which could never be answered on account of their esoteric nature, and thus would only become embarrassing.”
It had been declared from the first and has been repeatedly asserted since that:
1) No Theosophist, not even as an accepted chela [disciple] — let alone lay students — could expect to have the secret teachings explained to him thoroughly and completely, before he had irretrievably pledged himself to the Brotherhood and passed through at least one initiation, because no figures and numbers could be given to the public, for figures and numbers are the key to the esoteric system.
2) That what was revealed was merely the esoteric lining of that which is contained in almost all the exoteric Scriptures of the world-religions — pre-eminently in the Brahmanas, and the Upanishads of the Vedas and even in the Puranas. It was a small portion of what is divulged far more fully now in the present volumes; and even this is very incomplete and fragmentary.
When the present work was commenced, the writer, feeling sure that the speculation about Mars and Mercury was a mistake, applied to the Teachers by letter for explanation and an authoritative version. Both came in due time, and verbatim extracts from these are now given.
". . . . It is quite correct that Mars is in a state of obscuration at present, and Mercury just beginning to get out of it. You might add that Venus is in her last Round. . . . . . . . . . . If neither Mercury nor Venus have satellites, it is because of the reasons . . . (vide footnote supra, where those reasons are given), and also because Mars has two satellites to which he has no right. . . . . Phobos, the supposed inner satellite, is no satellite at all. As remarked long ago by Laplace and now by Faye (see comptes rendus, Tome XC., p. 569), Phobos keeps a too short periodic time, and therefore there ‘must exist some defect in the mother idea of the theory’ as Faye justly observes. . . . . Again, both (Mars and Mercury) are septenary chains, as independent of the Earth’s sidereal lords and superiors as you are independent of the ‘principles’ of Daumling (Tom Thumb) — which were perhaps his six brothers, with or without night-caps. . . . . . . . . . ‘Gratification of curiosity is the end of knowledge for some men,’ was said by Bacon, who was as right in postulating this truism, as those who were familiar with it before him were right in hedging off WISDOM from Knowledge, and tracing limits to that which is to be given out at one time. . . . Remember: —
'. . . . . . . . . . knowledge dwells
In heads replete with thoughts of other men,
Wisdom in minds attentive to their own. . . .'
You can never impress it too profoundly on the minds of those to whom you impart some of the esoteric teachings. . ." »
(p.163-165)
(Blavatsky died three years later in 1991.)
SINNETT
Sinnett did not accept that he had been wrong and continued to insist that Mars and Mercury do belong to the terrestrial chain.
In his book "The Growth of the Soul" (1896) he wrote:
« On the first globe of the series existence is altogether conditioned by surroundings corresponding with that which we call the Manasic Plane of the earth, while the lowest point of materiality touched by the second globe of the series is on a level with that which we here call the astral plane.
Life on the third planet on the downward series has already the physical vehicle, and that third planet, therefore, becomes perceptible to our present senses, and is in fact the planet Mars.
Passing onward from this earth, humanity again functions on a physical globe — the planet Mercury — and then passes to the sixth, the lowest materiality of which is astral, and to a seventh which, like the first, is altogether manasic.
. . .
Mars, the Earth, and Mercury are in evolutionary partnership, Mars being the planet behind the earth in the order of progress round the entire chain, and Mercury in advance of us. »
(Chapter 10)
(To illustrate this, I've included the graphic that the neo-theosophical scholar Arthur Powell included in his book "The Solar System.")
And
there we find that Sinnett added more lies to his falsehood because he
said that the subtle globes of the terrestrial chain are found on the
mental plane and on the astral plane, but that is incorrect as I will demonstrate below.
Sinnett
died in 1921, but until the end of his life and even afterward he
continued to insist that he was right and that Blavatsky was wrong, as
in his posthumous book "The First Days of Theosophy in Europe" (1922) he wrote:
« The Master's letter, from which she [Blavatsky] purported to give an
extract, does not contain what she claims and corresponds rather to her
own inquiries, but from a maliciously mutilated version of a letter
originally addressed to me. »
(p.92)
It
is true that Blavatsky omitted the second question that Mr. Sinnett
wrote, but that does not detract from the general meaning, so it is
invalid for Sinnett to use that argument to reject the correction that
Blavatsky made to him.
And in his book "The First Days of Theosophy in Europe" Sinnett also wrote:
« Finally, when Mrs. Besant, thanks to the expansion of her own
knowledge, definitively proved that Mars and Mercury belong to our
[terrestrial] evolutionary chain and performed functions in that chain
just as I had originally described them, she published a statement about
it in the magazine "Lucifer", vol. XVII, p. 271. »
(p.94)
And he wrote about this matter again in his "Autobiography" (1986):
« In
October 1888, Mary, following instructions from her guide, told us that
it would be very wise for us to become friends again with the Old Lady
[HPB], and so we did, asking her to come and have dinner with us.
She accepted our invitation and came to dinner, but in November the situation became tense again when the "Secret Doctrine" was published.
The beginning of this book contained, and still contains in its later editions, a kind of attack against "Esoteric Buddhism" in which it is alleged that I misinterpreted the Master's teaching in relation to Mars and Mercury.
Madame
Blavatsky believed that these planets were not part of our chain and
claims that she referred the matter to the Master and received a letter
from him, part of which she published in "The Secret Doctrine," apparently confirming her viewpoint.
. . .
Much
later, when Mrs. Besant and Mr. Leadbeater had already developed their
own psychic abilities and were able to verify the role played by Mars
and Mercury in the evolution of the human family, Mrs. Besant, then in
control of the magazine "Lucifer," published a statement vindicating the actual facts, although it is a pity that current editions of "The Secret Doctrine" are still tainted by this scandalous passage on this subject. »
(p.39-41)
What Sinnett didn't know was that Leadbeater pretended to have activated his clairvoyance, but in reality he was a fraud who did not have his clairvoyance awake and who only confirmed what Sinnett stated so that he would
continue to help him since Sinnett gave him a salary and housed
Leadbeater in his home.
And
Besant was a naive who let herself be completely deceived by
Leadbeater, who made her believe that he had activated her clairvoyance
when in reality he was only manipulating her into believing that she was
already perceiving psychically.
Researcher Gregory Tillett commented on this matter:
« In the summer of 1896, Mrs. Besant, Leadbeater, and Jinarajadasa spent a
holiday at Mr. and Mrs. Bright's summer home in Shepperton on the
Thames, where they continued their clairvoyant investigations. Jinarajadasa took copious notes but observed that Leadbeater did most of the clairvoyance, while Mrs. Besant merely added some extra detail. »
(The Elder Brother, p.65-66, excerpts)
SINNETT USES MEDIUMS
Furthermore,
Leadbeater, to support his belief, relied on what various mediums told
him, who supposedly communicated with the Masters, but in reality, they
were either charlatans, or were receiving answers from deceitful astral
entities that told Sinnett what he wanted to hear in order to continue
vampirizing his vital energy.
The use of Mary as his medium diminished after her marriage in 1893 and ceased completely in 1898.
Therefore, Sinnett used Leadbeater as a secondary medium from 1889 to 1894, but Leadbeater was not a medium and only pretended and was deceiving Sinnett by telling him what he wanted to hear.
Another
medium Sinnett used was Robert King, beginning in 1909. And through
King, Sinnett learned, by means of an incorporeal entity claiming to be
Pierre Simon Laplace, an eminent French astronomer, that Mars was still
inhabited by members of Earth humanity who had not been able to continue
their evolution on Earth, most of them laggards living in undignified
and degraded conditions.
King
also told him that the animals on Mars were exclusively reptiles that
inhabited the canals that several astronomers had seen. But it was
later learned that those canals were optical illusions created by the telescopes of his time.
And this shows you how increasingly delusional Sinnett's teaching became.
WHY IS SINNETT'S VERSION INCORRECT?
The
original Theosophical instructors (Kuthumi, Blavatsky, and William
Judge) explained that just as humans have seven envelopes: one physical
and six subtle; in the same way and under the Law of Correspondence
which says "as it is in the small, so it is in the large," the planets
also have six envelopes: one physical and six subtle.
In Theosophy, the envelopes of the planets are called globes, and the set of seven globes is called a planetary chain.
This implies that the terrestrial chain is composed of a physical globe, which is the Earth, and six subtle globes.
But
Mr. Alfred Sinnett did not understand this, and he taught in his books
that the terrestrial chain is composed of the planets Mars, Earth,
Mercury and four unknown globes.
But
to claim that is an aberration because it would be equivalent to
claiming that a human is composed of three physical bodies, which we all
know is false.
(Note: the globes are arranged in a U shape because the beings that evolve within them do so by descending in the first globes and then ascending in the last globes.)
Location of planetary chains
And not content with telling this lie, Sinnett continued adding more lies.
One of those lies was claiming that globes are located on the physical, emotional, mental, intuitional, and spiritual planes.
Which is false because Blavatsky in "The Secret Doctrine I" put a diagram on page 200 where she pointed
out that the subtle globes of the terrestrial chain (and by extension of
the other planetary chains) are located in the intermediate planes of the solar system:
Here's a simpler diagram:
Whereas the planes mentioned by Sinnett correspond to the subplanes of the densest plane of the solar system:
They are not the same names because Leadbeater distorted the original teaching:
- He calls the atmic plane: the spiritual plane.
- He calls the buddhic plane: the intuitional plane.
- He calls the manasic plane: the mental plane.
- He calls the kamic plane: the emotional plane.
- He put the astral plane inside the emotional plane.
- He put the pranic plane inside the physical plane.
So Leadbeater and Sinnett made a tremendous mess.
OBSERVATION
Sadly,
the false explanation invented by Sinnett and supported by Besant and
Leadbeater is the one that has spread the most throughout the world
thanks to the dissemination carried out by the Theosophical Society of
Adyar, and also because other liars (Steiner, Heindel, Bailey, etc.)
adopted it and taught it to their followers.
No comments:
Post a Comment