Theos-Talk Archives (January 1995 Message tl00207)

Responding to Jerry H-E regarding his "RE: "Re: CWL-two sides"" post:-

> Thank you both for taking up and discussing this topic.  CWL and
> psychism in general needs to be looked at with a far more
> objective lens than is normally used.

I'd agree we have to strive to be objective here and elsewhere,
yet to do it without sacrificing the heart side.

There's a mighty challenge here.

Concepts of brain and mind are becoming wider and more
spiritualised, in some quarters, due to the explosion of brain
research.  I recently attended a workshop by Charles Werner of
Honolulu where he expounded a holistic and holographic view of
the neo-cortex, recognising subtle connections between the vast
network of neurons and the rest of the universe, and how that
manifested in our consciousness.

And the scientific aspect is only one facet of the situation.
The archetypes and norms of a historical period must have a
profound effect on psychic perceptions as well as the way they
are described.  For instance, in CWL's younger days, the Western
world had a very mechanistic view of the universe - rashly
conceived and brashly expressed, we now see in retrospect.  A
Jungian approach would have a great deal to offer, here, plus an
examination of social aspects of the development of language and
thought.

Then the theosophical aspect, if you could call it that, could
cover how experiences or information from subtler levels, are
condensed or crystallised into the more concrete and more limited
forms of a lower plane, then perhaps to repeat the process.
There could be a wonderful marriage of clairvoyant research and
physical brain research here, correlating them to unravel some of
the processes of information and energy flow in consciousness.

Imagine a really good clairvoyant or two in the same room as a
PET or other brain scanner, with heaps of time, and heaps of
imagination! You'd need a multi-disciplinary team, working
together in harmony.  Yes, a sort of nucleus of the b****hood of
humanity !!!!

And heck, I've only covered a few aspects of all this!

Growing a young science is tricky when the very means of
perception in the field of interest are themselves so rare and
difficult to control, and so intimately connected to the objects
of observation.  Real pioneering stuff!

So I come around to a plea to be objective in criticising CWL as
well as in supporting him.  Let's also discuss the issues in
themselves without necessarily referring them to one person.
Somebody has already said that.

> I'm a little disappointed, however, that there is no comment on
> CWL's moral obligations to the parents--perhaps my observation
> was too obvious to merit comment.  Yet it is curious that it
> never seems to be raised.

My feeling about this is that trust is a highly important facet
of relationship in manifesting our connectedness which, in turn,
is an expression of the underlying unity.

It does not take a clairvoyant to sense the state of trust of a
relationship.  It probably _is_ "visible" to some clairvoyant
senses, but that is another issue.

I believe that a non-parental person who undertakes to
teach/mind/guard children has a degree of responsibility towards
the parent(s), as well as to a lesser degree to the state, ie the
greater network of humanity.  There is inevitably an element of
trust by the parents in the other person, and if all goes well,
that trust is not violated.

Secrets are a dicey issue, in this context.  We expect adults to
be able to keep a secret, as in the days of the mystery schools
when secret-keeping was a critical test and preparation of the
neophyte.

There conceivably could be circumstances in which you would
validly ask children to keep secrets from their parents, as a
sort of training, but when the secret is something that the
parents would consider to breach their trust, then I think damage
begins to be done to all the relationships involved.

Emotional blackmail is an extreme form of this, seen only too
often in abusive adult/child relationships - "don't tell your
mother or I will kill you" ...  whatever.  Even without
blackmail, I think that unnecessary tension and fragmentation of
the child's allegiances can result.

Whether CWL got into the blackmail area, I cannot say.  It would
be difficult to reconcile with the other characteristics of the
man, but then, would he have that on his own? People can be
self-blinded where strong desire exists, whilst wonderfully
perceptive in other areas.

The whole psychic aspect of sexuality needs to be considered,
too, but not here and now.  I have in mind the pathways that
universal creative energy may be considered to flow through the
several planes or principles of a person, and how those pathways
can be formed or deformed in childhood, to the anguish of the
person who may feel trapped in a pattern of feeling and behaviour
that they and the rest of society may detest.

Dionne Fortune's book "Esoteric Aspects of Love, Sex and
Marriage" presents this sort of idea in a very illuminating way.

This IS a painful area to contemplate and I've seen close at hand
how people can or can not believe that somebody they know and
love has done something they would consider impossible for that
person to do.

As a consequence, I try to steer clear of judging or accusing CWL
because, even with the documentation that we have, we can only
get a very partial view of the relationships and motives all
round.

Murray Stentiford
murray@sss.co.nz