Theos-Talk Archives (September 1996 Message tl00240)

At 12:23 AM 17/09/96 -0400, you wrote:
>In message <1.5.4.16.19960917152231.11ff2ec4@iprolink.co.nz>, Murray
>Stentiford <mas.jag@iprolink.co.nz> writes
>>
>>One of Hodson's observations was that most of the deva kingdom were too
>>wide-ranging in their consciousness and remote from ordinary concerns, or
>>just too busy, to care what people thought of them.
>
>My own empiracally derived conclusion - totally unprovable, of course.
>
>..snip...
>>
>>Another was that there are some members or groups whose work does bring them
>>into contact with humanity, and that some of these are willing, even keen,
>>to find human co-workers in fields like healing, music, ritual, childbirth,
>>agriculture, and just plain ol' life in the home. He's not the only observer
>>to report this.
>
>My own empiracally derived conclusion - totally unprovable, of course.
>There were a lot of them at Lockerbie, like high up in the sky where the
>"dead" were.  Many of them were former humans like ourselves, but
>discarnate.  Doing the Bhodisattva bit, maybe.  Many "angelic" entities
>seem to be ex-humans in a "higher"  - or better "further" - stage of
>development.

It would seem that there may be a difference of form and activity between
the deva kingdom and the angelic. Sometimes I have read that the two are one
and the same but that 'angels' are more evolved aspects of the deva kingdom.
I have as yet no contact with them that might be useful.
>
>Clairvoyance can take many forms, and cannot therefore, IMHO, lend
>itself to the scientific method of observation, much as I repeatedly
>advocate its use.  The most important factor, as I see it (from
>experience) is for *the clairvoyant* to learn as early as possibly that
>a strike rate of 100% cannot be reached, that 50% is doing well, and
>that even that 50% is liable to subjective interpretation.  I was once
>told by a communicating something/someone:
>
>"We can only use the vocabulary we find already available in your mind."
>(For direct communication).  The clear inference was to study as much as
>possible and to acquire as wide a vocabulary as possible!  I *have* been
>given clear and sometimes exact details of where to look (down here) for
>required information.

That is what I have been told also. I have had some amusing incidents when
channelling to others, when the intellegences used a certain terminology
which I did not think appropriate and there was a sort of mental flurry
while they rephrased themselves. I do not do that now as I have learned that
they seem to know what they are doing and there is often a good reason for
the way they put things. The fact that I can interfere if I wish, suits my
temperament.
>>
>>Hope this helps round out the picture.
>>
>And I hope this may help to add to it.  In spite of my often puerile
>(what's the feminine for "puerile?") attempts at humor, I do take all
>this occult stuff quite seriously - I have to!
>
>Taking the scientific approach as best I can, I have long described all
>such contacts, whether otherwise known as devas, angles of whatever, as
>hIntelligences - this is the only *defintive* means I can think of to
>avoid dogmatic, theological, theosophical or other preconceptions.

There is only a personal feeling of 'rightness' that one can go by in these
matters and one has to be vigilant all the time about the energy emitted by
what is happening. None of us have to believe anything coming from the
invisible realms but it is hard to deny that there is no invisible realms
even if one cannot prove anything much about them. It probably comes down to
one's personal belief system and how flexible it is. Even though I appear to
communicate with some sort of intelligence, I am aware that it could turn
out to be my higher self or else what it claims to be, as long as the info
is useful and makes sense then I will continue to accept the possibility. If
it all gets silly then it is time to review if it is me or whether I have
been duped. Either could be a possibility at some time but I take it as it
comes.
>
>Alan
>---------
>Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/
>THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age
>TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk
>http://WWW1.Minn.Net/~vlg/TI.html (Figure "one" after WWW)
>
>
Bee Brown
Member Theosophy NZ, TI.

A meeting is an event at which
the minutes are kept and the hours lost.