Theos-Talk Archives (September 1995 Message tl00031)

Brenda,

Brenda wrote quoting the Mahatma Letters:

>>And in THE MAHATMA LETTERS, p. 167, Letter XXIIIB, 1882, K.H.
>>says there is a Raja Sun behind Jupiter which no mortal
>>physical eye has ever seen during this Round.

and asked:

>>Should I attempt to muster up proof for this?

I replied:
>
> Why not? What kind of proof do you want to offer?

Brenda's replies and my answers to hers:

>The proof that I would offer, if I could, would be my own
>personal investigation through clairvoyance or discussion with
>somebody I trusted who used clairvoyance.

 Under the circumstances, that may be the only method open to
you, though I would not rule out radio astronomy, ultra violet
and infrared photography as well as x-ray photography. Lets face
it, cameras are more objective than people. I would look at
photographic evidence first.

>Your disproofs tend to be based on scientific findings, such as
>when the space probes photographed Mars. This isn't the same
>method of discovery so why use it as definitive, especially when
>you seem to be someone who has studied the existence of inner
>realms and their importance in any discussion about life.

 I think that the study of a phenomena by using different
methods of observation and measurement is a fruitful method to
seek the truth of the matter. I also prefer subjective
observations to be backed up by objective measurements. For
instance, if we suspect high amounts of iron in the Martian soil
based upon our observation that the soil is red, then find iron
in the soil through chemical analysis, that makes for a strong
case, doesn't it? However, if we found no iron in the Martian
soil though chemical analysis, I think we would be obliged to
start thinking about other possible reasons for the red soil.
Now, applying the same reasoning to CWL's Martian cities, I think
it is not unreasonable to conclude that the Viking photographs
throw serious question upon CWL's observations, to say the least.
I must remind you that CWL was quite clear in his description
that he was talking about physical cities on the physical plane
in the presence tense. Also, CWL himself often alluded to
physical visual evidence to substantiate his descriptions. For
instance, in his description of Mars, he cited telescopic
observations and explained that the astronomers were seeing:

 "The actual canals themselves are not visible to terrestrial
telescopes; what is seen is the belt of verdure which appears in
a tract of country on each side of the canal only at the time
when the water pours in. Just as Egypt exists only because of
the Nile, so do large districts on Mars exists only because of
these canals. From each side of them radiate at intervals
waterways, which run some miles into the surrounding country are
then subdivided into thousands of tiny streamlets, so that a
strip of country a hundred miles in width is thoroughly
irrigated. In this area are forests and cultivated fields, and
vegetation of all sorts starts forth in the greatest profusion,
making upon the surface of the planet a dark belt which is
visible to us even forty million miles away with the planet is at
it nearest and favorably situated." (~The Inner Life~ (1917
edition), vol.2, pp. 276-77).

 With the above description in mind, is it really
unreasonable to expect that since a distant telescopic image
bares out CWL's observations, that a closer look should confirm
them out also? But where are those complexes of canals and
forests that CWL saw and many astronomers of his time theorized
were there?

>In de Purucker's words, "That is what the scientific statment
>amounts to; nobody who believes that other planets are inhabited
>has ever made the preposterous claim that man, as we know him
>here, could live on these planets. Consequently the scientific
>answer is not responsive to the hypothesis that other planets
>are inhabited, for each planet is inhabited by its own kind and
>type of inhabitants, fitted by evolution to there."
>
>And he says that man on other planets is part of the ecosystem
>of each planet, living harmoniously with the planet's elements,
>temperatures, atmosphere, etc.

 I completely agree with de Purucker here. And this
"preposterous claim that man, as we know him could live on these
planets" (Mars in this case) is precisely the claim that CWL was
making. Allow me to quote again from the 1917 edition of ~The
Inner Life~:

 "In physical appearance the Martians are not unlike
ourselves, except that they are considerably smaller. The
tallest men are not above five feet in height and the majority
are two or three inches shorter. According to our ideas they are
somewhat broad in proportion, having very great chest capacity--a
fact which may possibly be due to the rarity of the air and the
consequent necessity of deep breathing on order fully to
oxygenate the blood. The whole civilized population of Mars is
one race, and there is practically no difference in features or
complexion, except that, just as among ourselves, there are
blonds and brunettes, some of the people having a faintly
yellowish skin and black hair, while the majority have yellow
hair and blue or violet eyes--somewhat Norwegian in appearance.
They dress mostly in brilliant colours, and both sexes wear an
almost shapeless garment of some very soft material which falls
straight from the shoulders down to the feet. Generally the feet
are bare, though they sometimes use a sort of metal sandal or
slipper, with a throng round the ankle.
 They are very found of flowers, of which there is a great
variety, and their towns are built on the general plan of the
garden-city, the houses usually being one-storeyed only, but
built round inner courtyards and straggling over a great deal of
ground. These houses look exteriorly as though built of coloured
glass, and indeed the material which is used is transparent, but
it is somehow so fluted that while the persons inside enjoy an
almost unimpeded view of their gardens, no one from outside can
see what is going on in the house." (vol. 2, pp. 277-78)

 CWL continues his long description with construction methods
for building their houses; the regularity of their language;
machines they use to record their voices; a description of their
writing and their books; the domestic animals they use to do
their work for them; and of course, the Political system under
which the people live.

Jerry Hejka-Ekins
Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu