Re: Theos-World Re: Judge Believed He was in Communication with the dead HPB
Apr 18, 2006 01:48 PM
by Bill Meredith
I think you are identifying areas of inquiry that are for me most
interesting. First though, I would like to say that I am really not
interested in lineages and feel that Crosby, Hargrove, and Tingley all
preserved aspects of theosophy in the organizations that they
continued on with. My motive has always been a moral one having to do
with the First Object and the ingratitude of later theosophists
towards the founders of the TS, the founders having sacrificed their
lives in order to bring to us the teachings. My opinions, like anyone
else's opinions on the guilt or innocence of HPB and WQJ really amount
to nothing. They are and always have been a distraction, and a means
of dividing the Society. It can truly be said at this point that if
there existed enough evidence to confirm their guilt or even present a
good case against them, that eveidence would have been brought forward
by the many enemies of theosophy that have existed within the Society
over the years. At this point, because we are left simply with
baseless accusations, it is pure ingratitude that keeps these
allegations alive. If someone wants to present a case AGAINST Judge
or Blavatsky, then I have no problem with this and will gladly debate
such an honest attempt. As there is not anyone presenting such a case
then we can surmise that everyone agrees that HPB and WQJ are innocent
or it must be that their enemies are cowards.
As for the Nirmanakaya speaking in HPB's voice, this is interesting.
Naturally, anything I say is speculation, but in stretching to
understand this, perhaps we may learn something. Remember HPB wrote:
"The trouble with you is that you do not know the great change that
came to pass in you a few years ago. Others have occasionally their
astrals changed and replaced by those of Adepts (as of Elementaries)
and they influence the outer, and the higher man. With you, it is the
NIRMANAKAYA not the 'astral' that blended with your astral. Hence the
dual nature and fighting." (Echoes, I, xxxv)
What if HPB is describing to Judge a similar process to the one that
she herself underwent? This would be one reason why she might be
familiar with such an esoteric process. HPB wrote this letter in
1886. "A few years ago" could refer to 1884 when Judge was in India.
This is the argument made by Ernest Pelletier in TJC, that Judge
underwent some sort of initiation at that time. There are 28 days
where his whereabouts are unknown.
How do we understand what HPB is trying to say here? No doubt it is
clear to Judge, but less so to me. One explanation might be as follows.
"Others have occasionally their astrals changed and replaced by those
of Adepts (as of Elementaries) and they influence the outer, and the
Is HPB saying here that sometimes an Adept replaces a chela's astral
with his own? In this position the more purified astral of the adept
would be expressed outwardly, and the consciousness with fewer
distractions would find it easier to influence his higher self? This
would be a beneficial influence. The opposite would be where an
Elementary managed to replace an individuals astral with its own -
hence the parenthetical comment.
"With you, it is the NIRMANAKAYA not the 'astral' that blended with
your astral. Hence the dual nature and fighting."
Here Judge is being told that the NIRMANAKAYA actually blended with
his astral, hence all the negative aspects of his own astral is there
in conjunction with the nobler aspects of the NIRMANAKAYA. This gave
Judge a "dual nature" in a sense. He was often fighting with himself,
or at least felt that this was so.
If HPB was the former case, the Adept blended with her Astral, maybe
after her death, the psychological apparatus that was HPB continued
for some time, animated by the Adept, and naturally she responded in
ways familiar to those who knew her.
This is speculation of course, but it points to the fact that there is
no one way in which occult procedures are conducted. Once you know
the principles, how you accomplish something is up to the
practitioners. As a novice, I tend to get trapped by definitions
sometimes and miss the point that this is a living doctrine. It is
not until I get questioned on these matters and actually begin to
think about them that I begin to see the possibilities. I hope this
helps as it certainly helped me clarify things.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application