Category Archives: Uncategorized

More US Drill Death in Waco Explosion – Drill Stops for Reality, Again

Ed Ward, MD's Blog: US Tyranny & Treason

63 Drills Since 93: Where the Drill and Reality Were ‘Coincidently’ Identical

63 government drills since 1993 - where the drill 'scenario' turned into the exact actual 'terrorist attack'. 63 government drills since 1993 – where the drill ‘scenario’ turned into the exact actual ‘terrorist attack’.

That we Know of.*

Again, if you could stomach the propaganda of at least after the fact accessories to murder. You heard from all the ‘Talking Heads’ about what a great job they were doing with the recent ‘fertilizer explosion’ near Waco. Surely, you heard of the ‘coincidental’ drill?

“Originally there was a post describing the drill, saying that it would be complete with actors, who would take almost 200 local hospital beds. The original announcement read:

North Hills Hospital is proud to be hosting one of the largest emergency preparedness drills ever held in the state of Texas this week. We will be partnering with the North Central Texas Trauma Regional Advisory Council (NCTTRAC) and first responders from throughout North…

View original post 2,584 more words

Happy 1st Birthday to R.O.T.I.

137063

Exactly one year ago I started my own truth blog on an impulse and it has developed into what you see today. In that time I have had a number of writers from all over the world contribute to the site from places like Canada, Australia, and right here in the U.S. In that time I wrote my first book that I released for free as an ebook which somewhat took on a life of its own. So do I regret it? Absolutely not! Even though it was a small number of people I still feel good about bringing people to the world of truth seeking. My purpose for R.O.T.I. Was never to gain followers, but merely to plant seeds in the minds of those that knew intuitively that something was wrong with the world and change was greatly needed. In that time I was called everything from insane to genius to great soul. But no matter what I was called whether good or bad, I knew that my heart was in the right place. Anyway to give you a taste of what’s to come in 2015 for R.O.T.I., as 2014 was meant to be a year of detachment, I feel 2015 will be a year of shock therapy. Meaning that the time is coming for everyone to leave their comfort zone. It is truly time to let go of fear because it will only harm the mission which is freedom for every man, woman and child on this planet. So never give up the fight and keep seeking truth. Don’t worry, we got this!

Mikey Indigo

Lets Re-cap History on our Anniversary.

In 740 A.D. in a land locked between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, known as Khazaria, a land which today is predominantly occupied by Georgia, but also reaches into Russia, Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, and Romania, the modern Jewish race is born. A modern Jewish race that incidentally is not Jewish.
How can this be, you ask? Well at that time, the Khazarian people felt a vulnerable people as they had Muslims one side of them and Christians the other side of them, and thus constantly feared attack from either side. Furthermore, the Khazarian people were of neither faith and instead practiced idol worship, which made them ripe for invasion by a people who wished to convert them to an established faith.
The Khazarian King, King Bulan, decided in order to protect themselves against attack, the Khazarian people must convert to one of these faiths, but which one? If they converted to the Muslim faith they would risk attack by the Christians and if they converted to the Christian faith they would risk attack by the Muslims.
He had an idea. There was another race that he was aware were able to deal with both the Muslims and the Christians either side of him, predominantly in matters of trade. A race which also dealt with Khazarians in the same manner. That race was the Jews. King Bulan decided if he instructed his people to convert to Judaism he could keep both the Muslims and the Christians happy, as they were both already willing to trade with the Jews, so this is what he did.
King Bulan was right. He would live to see his country unconquered, his people convert to Judaism enthusiastically and adopt the principles of the most holy Jewish book, the Talmud. There are many things the king would not live to see, however.
He would not live to see his Asiatic race of converts to Judaism, one day represent 90% of all the Jews on the planet, and call themselves Ashkenazi Jews, when in fact they were not Jews, but simply an Asiatic race of people who converted to the Jewish religion, whilst still continuing to speak the Khazarian language of Yiddish, totally different to the language of Hebrew.
He would not live to see his people turn to the descendants of a man, far more powerful than him, who would be born just over 1,000 years later in Germany, a man named Bauer, who would spawn the Rothschild dynasty.
He would not live to see this dynasty usurp the wealth of the world through deception and intrigue, which they would finance through the vast riches they accumulate as they usurp the wealth of the world by gaining control of the world’s money supply.
He would not live to see his people demand a homeland for themselves in Palestine as their birthright, and ensure every Prime Minister there from its inception in 1948 is an Ashkenazi Jew, even though the true homeland of the Ashkenazi Jews, Khazaria, is his kingdom, some 800 miles away.
And he would not live to see his people fulfil bible prophecy, as the, “Synagogue of Satan.”

1744
On February 23rd, Mayer Amschel Bauer, an Ashkenazi Jew, is born in Frankfurt, Germany, the son of Moses Amschel Bauer, a money lender and the proprietor of a counting house.
Moses Amschel Bauer places a red sign above the entrance door to his counting house. This sign is a red hexagram (that geometrically and numerically translates into the number 666), which under Rothschild instruction will end up on the Israeli flag some two centuries later.

1770
Mayer Amschel Rothschild draws up plans for the creation of the, “Illuminati,” and entrusts Ashkenazi Jew, Adam Weishaupt, a Crypto-Jew (a Jew who pretends he’s not Jewish) who is outwardly Roman Catholic, with its organization and development. The, “Illuminati,” is to be based upon the teachings of the Talmud, which is in turn, the teachings of Rabbinical Jews. It is to be called the, “Illuminati,” which is a Luciferian term which means, “keepers of the light.”
On August 29th, Mayer Amschel Rothschild marries Gutle Schnaper.

1771
On August 20th, Schönche Jeannette Rothschild is born, the first of Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s five daughters. She goes onto marry Benedikt Moses Worms.

1773
On June 12th, Amschel Mayer Rothschild is born, the first of Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s five sons. He, like all his brothers who follow him, will enter the family business at the age of twelve.

1774
On September 9th, Salomon Mayer Rothschild is born.

1776
Adam Weishaupt officially completes his organisation of the, “Illuminati,” on May 1st of this year. The purpose of the, “Illuminati,” is to divide the non-Jews through political, economic, social, and religious means. The plan is for the opposing sides of the goyim (non-Jews) to be armed whilst incidents are to be provided in order for them to fight amongst themselves; destroy national governments; destroy religious institutions; and eventually destroy each other.
Weishaupt soon infiltrates the Continental Order of Freemasons with this, “Illuminati,” doctrine and establishes lodges of the Grand Orient to be their secret headquarters. This is all under the orders and finance of Mayer Amschel Rothschild and the concept subsequently spreads into Masonic Lodges worldwide to the present day.
Weishaupt also recruits 2,000 paid followers including the most intelligent men in the field of arts and letters, education, science, finance, and industry. They are instructed to follow the following methods in order to control people: 1.  Use monetary and sex bribery to obtain control of men already in high places, in the various levels of all governments and other fields of endeavour. Once influential persons have fallen for the lies, deceits, and temptations of the Illuminati they are to be held in bondage by application of political and other forms of blackmail, threats of financial ruin, public exposure, and fiscal harm, even death to themselves and members of their families. 2.  The faculties of colleges and universities are to cultivate students possessing exceptional mental ability as well as belonging to well-bred families with international leanings, and recommend them for special training in internationalism, or rather the notion that only a one-world government can put an end to recurring wars and strife. Such training is to be provided by granting scholarships to those selected by the, “Illuminati.” 3.  All influential people trapped into coming under the control of the, “Illuminati,” plus the students who had been specially educated and trained, are to be used as agents and placed behind the scenes of all governments as experts and specialists. This is to ensure they advise the top executives to adopt policies which in the long-run serve the secret plans of the, “Illuminati,” one-world conspiracy and bring about the destruction of the governments and religions they are elected or appointed to serve. 4.  To obtain absolute-control of the press, at that time the only mass-communications media which distributed information to the public, so that all news and information could be slanted in order to make the masses believe that a one-world government is the only solution to the world’s many and varied problems.

Hemp and Cannabis Can Save the World ~v.easleyii

The Cannabis Plant has been used as Fiber, Food and Medicine for thousands of Years.

It’s only since the Last Century that this Plant’s Prohibition was fraudulently induced upon the World, depriving Each of Us of Our Health, Wealth and Happiness

Hemp and Marijuana both come from the same plant – Cannabis

‘Hemp’ is the industrial/commercial use of the cannabis stalk and seed for textiles, foods, papers, body care products, detergents, plastics and building materials.

Marijauna is the flowers (bud) of the Plant ingested for Medical and Recreational use [sound of hitt’n a “J” (PuffPuffPass)]

(It does after all get) people high. THC triggers cannabinoid receptors in the brain and this produces the sensation of being stoned. These receptors are found in the parts of the brain linked to pleasure, memory, concentration, and time perception.
http://www.alternet.org/drugs/healing-power-marijuana-has-barely-been-tapped

Marijuana does NOT pose a threat to the general public. Marijuana is very much a danger to the oil companies, alcohol, tobacco industries and a large number of chemical corporations. Various big businesses, with plenty of dollars and influence, have suppressed the truth from the people.

The truth is if marijuana was utilized for its vast array of commercial products, it would create an industrial atomic bomb! Entrepreneurs have not been educated on the product potential of pot. The super rich have conspired to spread misinformation about an extremely versatile plant that, if used properly, would ruin their companies.
cont. reading> http://www.illuminati-news.com/marijuana-conspiracy.htm

~
Back Ground

1919 The 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution banned the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol and positioned marijuana as an attractive alternative leading to an increase in use of the substance.

1933 The U.S. congress repealed the 21st Amendment, ending alcohol prohibition; 4 years later the prohibition of marijuana will be in full effect.

1936 The American propaganda film Reefer Madness was made to scare American youth away from using Cannabis.

1937 U.S. Congress passed the Marijuana Tax Act which criminalized the drug. In response Dr. William C. Woodward, testifying on behalf of the AMA, told Congress that, “The American Medical Association knows of no evidence that marijuana is a dangerous drug” and warned that a prohibition “loses sight of the fact that future investigation may show that there are substantial medical uses for Cannabis.” His comments were ignored by Congress. A part of the testimony for Congress to pass the 1937 act derived from articles in newspapers owned by William Randolph Hearst, who had significant financial interests in the timber industry, which manufactured his newsprint paper.

1941 Cannabis is removed from the U.S. Pharmacopoeia and it’s medicinal use is no longer recognized in America

1951 The Boggs Act and the Narcotics Control Act in the U.S. increases all drug penalties and laid down mandatory sentences.

1970 The US National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) forms. That same year the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act repealed mandatory penalties for drug offenses and marijuana was categorized separately from other narcotics.

1972 The Nixon-appointed Shafer Commission urged use of cannabis be re-legalized, but their recommendation was ignored. U.S. Medical research picks up pace. Proposition 19 in California to legalize marijuana use is rejected by a voter margin of 66-33%.

1976 The U.S. federal government created the Investigational New Drug (IND) Compassionate Use research program to allow patients to receive up to nine pounds of cannabis….

1977-1981 U.S. President Carter, including his assistant for drug policy, Dr. Peter Bourne, pushed for decriminalization of marijuana, with the president himself asking Congress to abolish federal criminal penalties for those caught with less than one ounce of marijuana.

1986 President Reagan signed the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, reinstating mandatory minimums and raising federal penalties for possession and distribution and officially begins the U.S. international “war on drugs.”

1996 California (the first U.S. state to ban marijuana use, see 1915) became the first U.S. State to then re-legalize medical marijuana use for people suffering from AIDS, cancer, and other serious illnesses. A similar bill was passed in Arizona the same year. This was followed by the passage of similar initiatives in Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Washington D.C., Hawaii, Maryland, New Mexico, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

1997 The American Office of National Drug Control Policy commissioned the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to conduct a comprehensive study of the medical efficacy of cannabis therapeutics. The IOM concluded that cannabis is a safe and effective medicine, patients should have access, and the government should expand avenues for research and drug development. The federal government completely ignored its findings and refused to act on its recommendations.

1997-2001 In direct contradiction to the IOM recomendations, President Clinton, continuing the Regan and Bush “war on drugs” era, began a campaign to arrest and prosecute medical cannabis patients and their providers in California and elsewhere.
1999 Hawaii and North Dakota unsuccessfully attempt to legalize hemp farming. The U.S. DEA reclassifies dronabinol as a schedule III drug, making the medication easier to prescribe while marijuana itself continues to be listed Schedule I as having “no accepted medical use.”

2001-2009 Under President G.W. Bush the U.S. federal government intensified its “war on drugs” targeting both patients and doctors across the state of California.

2009 President Obama made steps toward ending the very unsuccessful 20-year “war on drugs” initiated during the Regan administration by stating that individual drug use is really a public health issue, and should be treated as such. Under his guidance, the U.S. Justice Department announced that federal prosecutors will no longer pursue medical marijuana users and distributors who comply with state laws.

2010 Proposition 19 to legalize marijuana in California is placed back on the ballet (named The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010). Current voter poles suggest that the proposition has about 50% population support and will likely win or loose by a margin of only 2%.

Oct 2010 Just weeks before the November 02 California election on Prop. 19 Attorney General Eric Holder said federal authorities would continue to enforce U.S. laws that declare the drug is illegal, even if voters approve the initiative, stating “we will vigorously enforce the (Controlled Substances Act) against those individuals and organizations that possess, manufacture or distribute marijuana for recreational use.”

The 10,000-year World History of Hemp and Cannabis
Complete world history of marijuana use with embedded videos from around the web
http://www.advancedholistichealth.org/history.html

~
Marijuana Timeline

1600-1890s Domestic production of hemp encouraged

1906 Pure Food and Drug Act

1900 – 20s Mexican immigrants introduce recreational use of marijuana leaf

1930s Fear of marijuana / 1930 Creation of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN) / 1932 Uniform State Narcotic Act / 1936 “Reefer Madness” / 1937 Marijuana Tax Act

1940s “Hemp for Victory” / 1944 La Guardia Report finds marijuana less dangerous

1951-56 Stricter Sentencing Laws

1960’s Marijuana use popular in counterculture / 1968 Creation of the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs

1970 Repeal of most mandatory minimum sentences / Marijuana differentiated from other drugs / National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) founded / 1972 Shafer Commission / 1973 Creation of the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) / 1974 High Times founded / 1976 Beginning of parents’ movement against marijuana

1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act – Mandatory Sentences / 1989 Bush’s War on Drugs

1996 Medical Use Legalized in California

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/dope/etc/cron.html

~
Why is Marijuana Illegal?

(because) Anslinger was an extremely ambitious man, and he recognized the Bureau of Narcotics as an amazing career opportunity — a new government agency with the opportunity to define both the problem and the solution. He immediately realized that opiates and cocaine wouldn’t be enough to help build his agency, so he latched on to marijuana and started to work on making it illegal at the federal level.

Anslinger immediately drew upon the themes of racism and violence to draw national attention to the problem he wanted to create.
http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/why-is-marijuana-illegal/

Pubdate: 1961
Source: The Murderers, the story of the narcotic gangs
Authors: Harry J. Anslinger, U. S. Commissioner of Narcotics and Will Oursler
Pages: 541-554
http://www.hempology.org/ALL%20HISTORY%20ARTICLES.HTML/1961;%20ANSLINGER%20MURDERERS.html

Many articles about and testimony by Harry J. Anslinger can be found at Cliff Shaffer’s Drug Library:
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/people/anslinger/index.htm

more links on Anslinger
http://www.csdp.org/publicservice/anslinger.htm
http://www.ukcia.org/potculture/20/lies.html

Full Text of the Marihuana Tax Act as passed in 1937http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/mjtaxact.htm

The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 was a United States Act that placed a tax on the sale of cannabis. The Act is now commonly referred to using the modern spelling as the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act. The Act levied a tax equaling roughly one dollar on anyone who dealt commercially in cannabis, hemp, or marijuana. The Act did not itself criminalize the possession or usage of hemp, marijuana, or cannabis, but it included penalty and enforcement provisions to which marijuana, cannabis, or hemp handlers were subject. Violation of these procedures could result in a fine of up to $2,000 and up to five years’ imprisonment.
http://www.peachridgeglass.com/2013/02/cannibis-bottlemarijuana-tax-act-1937/ +images&more

Marijuana Tax Stamp held Unconstitutional.

In 1969, the United States Supreme Court declared that the Marihuana Tax Stamp Act of 1937 was unconstitutional, because it required that the person seeking a tax stamp incriminate himself in direct violation of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The federal government responded by passing The Controlled Substances Act in 1970, citing ‘interstate commerce’ as the basis for its authority. The United States Supreme Court recognized the so called ‘commerce clause’ to uphold a series of laws that have effectively gutted the Tenth Amendment and its reservation of rights to the states and to the people. Congress has since used the ‘commerce clause’ to justify just any action that it wants to take.

Marijuana has been illegal ever since 1937, the federal government continues to spell it “marihuana”, and classifies it as a Schedule 1 controlled substance, alongside heroin, opium, morphine, LSD, and ecstasy. See our Marihuana Crimes and Offenses page for additional information on marijuana crimes and penalties.
http://brucealanblock.com/why-marijuana-became-legal/

~
The War on Marijuana is a Failure
By The Gregory Brothers

Over the last twenty years, much of the war of drugs has become a war on marijuana. According to new research from the ACLU, nearly half of all drug arrests in 2010 were for marijuana possession – with cops busting someone every (37)/41 seconds just for having weed. And the bulk of those arrested were Black. Despite the fact that Blacks and whites use pot at roughly the same rates, the ACLU found that Blacks were nearly 4 times as likely to be busted for having marijuana. The expense is staggering: states are wasting about $3.6 billion a year enforcing marijuana laws – money that could be better invested.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/criminal-law-reform-racial-justice/war-marijuana-failure

~
Hemp is Earth’s number-one biomass resource; it is capable of producing 10 tons per acre in four months.

– Hemp biodegradable plastic:

– In 1941 Henry Ford built a plastic car made of fiber from hemp and wheat straw. Hemp plastic is biodegradable, synthetic plastic is not.

– Car fuel made from hemp:

– Biomass can be converted to methane, methanol, or gasoline at a cost comparable to petroleum.

– Hemp fuel burns clean. Petroleum causes acid rain due to sulfur pollution.

– Hemp for energy:

– Hemp can produce 10 times more methanol than corn.

– Cannabis for food:

– Hemp seed can be pressed into a nutritious oil, which contains the highest amount of fatty acids in the plant kingdom. Essential oils are responsible for our immune system responses, and clear the arteries of cholesterol and plaque.

– Hemp seed protein is one of mankind’s finest, most complete and available-to-the-body vegetable proteins.

– Hemp for paper:

– One acre of hemp can produce as much usable fiber as 4 acres of trees or two acres of cotton.

– Trees cut down to make paper take 50 to 500 years to grow, while hemp can be cultivated in as little as 100 days and can yield 4 times more paper over a 20 year period.

Hemp vs trees (for deforestation):

– One acre of hemp produces as much cellulose fiber pulp as 4.1 acres of trees, making hemp a perfect material to replace trees for pressed board, particle board, and concrete construction molds.

– Isochanvre, a rediscovered French building material made from hemp hurds mixed with lime petrifies into a mineral state and lasts for many centuries. Archeologists have found a bridge in the south of France from the Merovingian period (500-751 A.D.), built with this process.

http://defendingthetruth.com/americas/4618-cannabis-healing-nations.html

What Is Hemp Plastic?

Hemp Plastic is an affordable bio based natural fibre composite to replace oil based raw materials.

Designed in Europe over 15 years and now produced in China, Hemp Plastics compete with engineering compounds in properties such as stiffness and high heat tolerance (HDT).

Both biodegradable and recyclable blends address global policies for CO2 reduction and oil dependence.

Hemp plastics are not made from hemp oil or hemp seeds, but from the stalk. They are the preferred options to PP-glass fibre, High Heat ABS and PC/ABS.

Flame retardant for specific grades, using halogen-free additives.

http://www.hempplastic.com/

Hemp plastic – the future of bioplastics.

Henry Ford was fond of saying, “Why use up the forests which were centuries in the making and the mines which required ages to lay down if we can get the equivalent of forests and mineral products from the annual growth of the fields?“

George Washington Carver had a response: “I believe that the great Creator has put ores and oil on this earth to give us a breathing spell. As we exhaust our finite resources, we must be prepared to fall back on our farms, which is Gods true storehouse and can never be exhausted. We can learn to synthesize material for every human need from things that grow.”

That “breathing spell” ended 60 years ago when Henry Ford built his car. Since then, we have cut down half of the worlds forests, a primary source of clean air. Only 3 percent of the U.S. original forests still remain. Much of Australia’s old-growth forests are being cut down for wood chips. If we dont start using hemp to help build our societies, what will we use?
http://www.hempowered.com/hemp-plastics

http://rense.com/general67/ford.htm >
Henry Ford’s first Model-T was built to run on hemp gasoline and the CAR ITSELF WAS CONSTRUCTED FROM HEMP! On his large estate, Ford was photographed among his hemp fields. The car, ‘grown from the soil,’ had hemp plastic panels whose impact strength was 10 times stronger than steel; Popular Mechanics, 1941.http://www.illuminati-news.com/marijuana-conspiracy.htm

Versatiliy:

-A Popular Mechanics article from 1938 stated that over 25,000 different products could be made from hemp in oil, seed or fibre form.[xvi]

-Used for thousands of years by a wide variety of cultures, hemp is currently being used worldwide in industries such as fabric, food, bio-diesel fuel, paper, plastics, rope, building material, molded panels, car components, wallpaper, acoustic baffling and barn bedding for farm animals.[xvii]

-125 years ago, 70 to 90 percent of all rope, twine, cordage, ship sails, canvas, fibre, cloth, etc., was made out of hemp fibre. It was replaced by Dupont’s then newly discovered petrochemical fibre (nylon) beginning in 1937. [xviii]
http://www.hempfarm.org/Papers/Hemp_Facts.html

~
The Healing Power of Marijuana Has Barely Been Tapped.

(It) …can be medically useful for pain relief, calming and appetite stimulation. It already has confirmed benefits against glaucoma, epilepsy and other specific diseases and disorders.http://www.alternet.org/drugs/healing-power-marijuana-has-barely-been-tapped

Endogenous cannabinoids play a role in the modulation of immune response and control of cancer cell proliferation.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12052046

Obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and even cancer may very well “run in the family”—meaning it’s a trend within your immediate ancestry—but our growing urge to call something inherited is not doing anyone any good. You see, the health concerns we often blame on our parents (or grandparents) are usually within our control. As a matter of fact, it’s estimated that less than 1% of all diseases are caused by flawed genes.

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/still-blaming-your-genes-for-your-health-think-again/#ixzz2dym1podT

~
Currently, there is a tremendous amount of controversy with respect to the effects that cannabinoids have on cancers. Endocannabinoids, phytocannabinoids, and synthetic cannabinoids have demonstrated cancer killing and anti-metastatic properties in tissue culture and in animal models. While formal, proper, FDA approved clinical trials that would prove or disprove the therapeutic potential of cannabis extracts for treating cancers; trials have not been carried out. Nevertheless, a significant number of anecdotal observations have accumulated that suggest people suffering from a variety of cancers appear to have been cured by ingesting what is known as “Rick Simpson’s hemp oil”. www.cannabisscience.com

Physician’s documentation confirms successful treatment of basal cell carcinoma with topical cannabis extract
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20110407/Physicians-documentation-confirms-successful-treatment-of-basal-cell-carcinoma-with-topical-cannabis-extract.aspx

Cannabinoids, endocannabinoids, and cancer.

The endocannabinoid system consists of an array of endogenously produced bioactive lipids that activate cannabinoid receptors. Although the primary focus of endocannabinoid biology has been on neurological and psychiatric effects, recent work has revealed several important interactions between the endocannabinoid system and cancer. Several different types of cancer have abnormal regulation of the endocannabinoid system that contributes to cancer progression and correlates to clinical outcomes. Modulation of the endocannabinoid system by pharmacological agents in various cancer types reveals that it can mediate antiproliferative and apoptotic effects by both cannabinoid receptor-dependent and -independent pathways. Selective agonists and antagonists of the cannabinoid receptors, inhibitors of endocannabinoid hydrolysis, and cannabinoid analogs have been utilized to probe the pathways involved in the effects of the endocannabinoid system on cancer cell apoptosis, proliferation, migration, adhesion, and invasion. The antiproliferative and apoptotic effects produced by some of these pharmacological probes reveal that the endocannabinoid system is a promising new target for the development of novel chemotherapeutics to treat cancer.

PMID: 22038019 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE] PMCID: PMC3366283 Free PMC Article
Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2011 Dec;30(3-4):599-612. doi: 10.1007/s10555-011-9318-8.

Cannabinoids, endocannabinoids, and cancer.

Hermanson DJ, Marnett LJ.
Source
AB Hancock Jr Memorial Laboratory for Cancer Research, Departments of Biochemistry, Vanderbilt Institute of Chemical Biology, Center in Molecular Toxicology, Vanderbilt Ingram Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232-0146, USA.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22038019

more studies>

Brain Cancer

1. A study published in the British Journal of Cancer, conducted by the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Complutense University in Madrid, this study determined that Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and other cannabinoids inhibit tumour growth. They were responsible for the first clinical study aimed at assessing cannabinoid antitumoral action. Cannabinoid delivery was safe and was achieved with zero psychoactive effects. THC was found to decrease tumour cells in two out of the nine patients.

2. A study published in The Journal of Neuroscience examined the biochemical events in both acute neuronal damage and in slowly progressive, neurodegenerative diseases. They conducted a magnetic resonance imaging study that looked at THC (the main active compound in marijuana) and found that it reduced neuronal injury in rats. The results of this study provide evidence that the cannabinoid system can serve to protect the brain against neurodegeneration.

3. A study published in The Journal of Pharmacology And Experimental Therapeutics already acknowledged the fact that cannabinoids have been shown to possess antitumor properties. This study examined the effect of cannabidiol (CBD, non psychoactive cannabinoid compound) on human glioma cell lines. The addition of cannabidiol led to a dramatic drop in the viability of glioma cells. Glioma is the word used to describe brain tumour. The study concluded that cannabidiol was able to produce a significant antitumor activity.

4. A study published in the journal Molecular Cancer Therapeutics outlines how brain tumours are highly resistant to current anticancer treatments, which makes it crucial to find new therapeutic strategies aimed at improving the poor prognosis of patients suffering from this disease. This study also demonstrated the reversal of tumour activity in Glioblastoma multiforme.

Breast Cancer

5. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine, conducted by the California Pacific Medical Centre determined that cannabidiol (CBD) inhibits human breast cancer cell proliferation and invasion. They also demonstrated that CBD significantly reduces tumour mass.

6. A study published in The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics determined that THC as well as cannabidiol dramatically reduced breast cancer cell growth. They confirmed the potency and effectiveness of these compounds.

7. A study published in the Journal Molecular Cancer showed that THC reduced tumour growth and tumour numbers. They determined that cannabinoids inhibit cancer cell proliferation, induce cancer cell apoptosis and impair tumour angiogenesis (all good things). This study provides strong evidence for the use of cannabinoid based therapies for the management of breast cancer.

8. A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS) determined that cannabinoids inhibit human breast cancer cell proliferation.

Lung Cancer

9. A study published in the journal Oncogene, by Harvard Medical Schools Experimental Medicine Department determined that THC inhibits epithelial growth factor induced lung cancer cell migration and more. They go on to state that THC should be explored as novel therapeutic molecules in controlling the growth and metastasis of certain lung cancers.

10. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine by the Institute of Toxicology and Pharmacology, from the Department of General Surgery in Germany determined that cannabinoids inhibit cancer cell invasion. Effects were confirmed in primary tumour cells from a lung cancer patient. Overall, data indicated that cannabinoids decrease cancer cell invasiveness.

11. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine, conducted by Harvard Medical School investigated the role of cannabinoid receptors in lung cancer cells. They determined its effectiveness and suggested that it should be used for treatment against lung cancer cells.

Prostate Cancer

12. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine illustrates a decrease in prostatic cancer cells by acting through cannabinoid receptors.

13. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine outlined multiple studies proving the effectiveness of cannabis on prostate cancer.

14. Another study published by the US National Library of Medicine determined that clinical testing of CBD against prostate carcinoma is a must. That cannabinoid receptor activation induces prostate carcinoma cell apoptosis. They determined that cannabidiol significantly inhibited cell viability.

Blood Cancer

15. A study published in the journal Molecular Pharmacology recently showed that cannabinoids induce growth inhibition and apoptosis in matle cell lymphoma. The study was supported by grants from the Swedish Cancer Society, The Swedish Research Council and the Cancer Society in Stockholm.

16. A study published in the International Journal of Cancer also determined and illustrated that cannabinoids exert antiproliferative and proapoptotic effects in various types of cancer and in mantle cell lymphoma.

17. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine conducted by the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology by Virginia Commonwealth University determined that cannabinoids induce apoptosis in leukemia cells.

Oral Cancer

18. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine results show cannabinoids are potent inhibitors of cellular respiration and are toxic to highly malignant oral Tumours.

Liver Cancer

19. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine determined that that THC reduces the viability of human HCC cell lines (Human hepatocellular liver carcinoma cell line) and reduced the growth.

Pancreatic Cancer

20. A study published in The American Journal of Cancer determined that cannabinoid receptors are expressed in human pancreatic tumor cell lines and tumour biopsies at much higher levels than in normal pancreatic tissue. Results showed that cannabinoid administration induced apoptosis. They also reduced the growth of tumour cells, and inhibited the spreading of pancreatic tumour cells.

Sources:

All sources highlighted throughout article. Click on the highlighted parts of the article to view them.

1)http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/178/2/116.full

Thnx, Holy Hemp>

The isolation and identification of two compounds with predominant radical scavenging activity in hempseed (seed of Cannabis sativa L.).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23107724

Cannabisin B induces autophagic cell death by inhibiting the AKT/mTOR pathway and S phase cell cycle arrest in HepG2 cells
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308814612018468

Cannabimovone, a Cannabinoid with a Rearranged Terpenoid Skeleton from Hemp
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejoc.200901464/abstract

Cannabioxepane, a novel tetracyclic cannabinoid from hemp, Cannabis sativa L.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040402011004157

Cannabidiolic acid, a major cannabinoid in fiber-type cannabis, is an inhibitor of MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell migration.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/22963825/?i=7&from=cannabidiol

Industrial hemp decreases intestinal motility stronger than indian hemp in mice
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23467947

Selection for Non-Psychoactive Hemp Varieties
(Cannabis sativa L.) in the CIS (former USSR)
http://www.druglibrary.org/olsen/hemp/IHA/iha03109.html

Cannabigerol from Bernabeo Hemp
http://www.ecpgr.cgiar.org/fileadmin/www.ecpgr.cgiar.org/NW_and_WG_UPLOADS/Fibre_Crops_2010/Italy_Hemp.pdf
http://www.ecpgr.cgiar.org/fileadmin/www.ecpgr.cgiar.org/Presentations/Fibre_crops_NL_2006/Italy%20Hemp%20collections.pdf

Cannabigerol from USO-31 Hemp (although this website should have noted that it is not the primary phytocannabinoid in all of the plants from this particular variety)
http://www.cannadata.eu/index.php?id=strains&language=en&strain=94

Terpenes in Hemp (see charts)
http://www.hanf-info.ch/info/en/Essential-oil-another-hemp.html

Fibre hemp inflorescences: From crop-residues to essential oil production
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0926669010001421

Fat to treat fat: Emerging relationship between dietary PUFA, endocannabinoids, and obesity
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1098882312001372

Nutritional Omega-3 deficiency abolishes
endocannabinoid mediated neuronal functions
http://www.tara.tcd.ie/bitstream/2262/58068/1/PEER_stage2_10.1038%252Fnn.2736.pdf

Cannabigerol monomethyl ether, a new component of hemp.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5706840

To summarize, I’d like to say that I agree with the Federal Government. Marijuana does victimize individuals. Or should I say that the enforcement of arcane, unjust laws victimize individuals, our states and our nation. Productive members of society are often victimized for mere possession, tainting their lives and their careers permanently. Valuable resources are diverted for the use of Marijuana law enforcement. Revenue is lost from Marijuana taxation. Drug dealers are growing in riches and power as long as they can profit from the sale of Marijuana, often financing their other operations including violence, intimidation, murder and hard drugs.

Big government is on steroidal growth with their power over the average American citizen. All rights to privacy are quickly evaporating.

Soon, George Orwell’s imagined police state will be the norm. We are not just talking about an individual’s right to fair use of medicine, recreation and relaxation. No, the issue is much bigger than this. We are talking about survival as a nation. Survival as free American citizens enjoying the same opportunities as our ancestors.

Government interference into our normal, everyday private lives is creating havoc. Our economy is collapsing, government continues to act contrary to public opinion by meddling in foreign affairs that do not concern us. Adopt George Washington’s opinion and refrain from such meddling! Political correctness has become a cancer, changing the core values of our society. Stress is mounting on the average citizen. There is mounting joblessness and hopelessness. Where is the vent? Violence or alcohol? Maybe. Marijuana, however, is a very viable alternative to the ever increasing pressures being placed upon us. It is therapy for the mind, soul and body. It is peace. I choose no worries over the alternative. I choose Marijuana!!!

Vincent Ray Easley II

Hemp and Cannabis can Save the World ~ the Buzzed Beaver Report, archived> http://www.ucy.tv/streams/64k/201395-20-64k.mp3: ~ Vince Easley http://ucy.tv/WMW ~ Thursday 8pm EDT . Sept 5th, 2013 . ~ Guests . Diane-Marie Jensen, https://www.facebook.com/Moms4MJ . Michael Dussault-Jensen, Executive Director,http://dadsformarijuana.org/ Dads For Marijuana International & Ken (Putemup) Miller, Founder, Director · Fluoride Free Humanity, Fort Wayne, Indiana,https://www.facebook.com/YouAreWhatYouConsume / In the 2nd hour, Jose M. Gonzalez w/ “Addiction’s Effects on Relationships” ~ ty Becky Quarles, Production. Youtube Video to follow. Call In Number: 1-718-717-8296

THEOSOPHICAL TEACHINGS AS TO NATURE AND MAN.

THE UNITY OF ALL IN ALL

ENQUIRER. Having told me what God, the Soul and Man are not, in your views, can you inform me what they are, according to your teachings?

THEOSOPHIST. In their origin and in eternity the three, like the universe and all therein, are one with the absolute Unity, the unknowable deific essence I spoke about some time back. We believe in no creation, but in the periodical and consecutive appearances of the universe from the subjective on to the objective plane of being, at regular intervals of time, covering periods of immense duration.

ENQUIRER. Can you elaborate the subject?

THEOSOPHIST. Take as a first comparison and a help towards a more correct conception, the solar year, and as a second, the two halves of that year, producing each a day and a night of six months’ duration at the North Pole. Now imagine, if you can, instead of a Solar year of 365 days, ETERNITY. Let the sun represent the universe, and the polar days and nights of 6 months each — days and nights lasting each 182 trillions and quadrillions of years, instead of 182 days each. As the sun arises every morning on our objective horizon out of its (to us) subjective and antipodal space, so does the Universe emerge periodically on the plane of objectivity, issuing from that of subjectivity — the antipodes of the former. This is the “Cycle of Life.” And as the sun disappears from our horizon, so does the Universe disappear at regular periods, when the “Universal night” sets in. The Hindoos call such alternations the “Days and Nights of Brahma,” or the time of Manvantara and that of Pralaya (dissolution). The Westerns may call them Universal Days and Nights if they prefer. During the latter (the nights) All is in All; every atom is resolved into one Homogeneity.

EVOLUTION AND ILLUSION

ENQUIRER. But who is it that creates each time the Universe?

THEOSOPHIST. No one creates it. Science would call the process evolution; the pre-Christian philosophers and the Orientalists called it emanation: we, Occultists and Theosophists, see in it the only universal and eternal reality casting a periodical reflection of itself on the infinite Spatial depths. This reflection, which you regard as the objective material universe, we consider as a temporary illusion and nothing else. That alone which is eternal is real.

ENQUIRER. At that rate, you and I are also illusions.

THEOSOPHIST. As flitting personalities, to-day one person, to-morrow another — we are. Would you call the sudden flashes of the Aurora borealis, the Northern lights, a “reality,” though it is as real as can be while you look at it? Certainly not; it is the cause that produces it, if permanent and eternal, which is the only reality, while the other is but a passing, illusion.

ENQUIRER. All this does not explain to me how this illusion called the universe originates; how the conscious to be, proceeds to manifest itself from the unconsciousness that is.

THEOSOPHIST. It is unconsciousness only to our finite consciousness. Verily may we paraphrase verse v, in the 1st chapter of St. John, and say “and (Absolute) light (which is darkness) shineth in darkness (which is illusionary material light); and the darkness comprehendeth it not.” This absolute light is also absolute and immutable law. Whether by radiation or emanation — we need not quarrel over terms — the universe passes out of its homogeneous subjectivity on to the first plane of manifestation, of which planes there are seven, we are taught. With each plane it becomes more dense and material until it reaches this, our plane, on which the only world approximately known and understood in its physical composition by Science, is the planetary or Solar system — one sui generis, we are told.

ENQUIRER. What do you mean by sui generis?

THEOSOPHIST. I mean that, though the fundamental law and the universal working of laws of Nature are uniform, still our Solar system (like every other such system in the millions of others in Cosmos) and even our Earth, has its own programme of manifestations differing from the respective programmes of all others. We speak of the inhabitants of other planets and imagine that if they are men, i. e., thinking entities, they must be as we are. The fancy of poets and painters and sculptors never fails to represent even the angels as a beautiful copy of man — plus wings. We say that all this is an error and a delusion; because, if on this little earth alone one finds such a diversity in its flora, fauna and mankind — from the sea-weed to the cedar of Lebanon, from the jelly-fish to the elephant, from the Bushman and negro to the Apollo Belvedere — alter the conditions cosmic and planetary, and there must be as a result quite a different flora, fauna and mankind. The same laws will fashion quite a different set of things and beings even on this our plane, including in it all our planets. How much more different then must be external nature in other Solar systems, and how foolish is it to judge of other stars and worlds and human beings by our own, as physical science does!

ENQUIRER. But what are your data for this assertion?

THEOSOPHIST. What science in general will never accept as proof — the cumulative testimony of an endless series of Seers who have testified to this fact. Their spiritual visions, real explorations by, and through, physical and spiritual senses untrammelled by blind flesh, were systematically checked and compared one with the other, and their nature sifted. All that was not corroborated by unanimous and collective experience was rejected, while that only was recorded as established truth which, in various ages, under different climes, and throughout an untold series of incessant observations, was found to agree and receive constantly further corroboration. The methods used by our scholars and students of the psycho-spiritual sciences do not differ from those of students of the natural and physical sciences, as you may see. Only our fields of research are on two different planes, and our instruments are made by no human hands, for which reason perchance they are only the more reliable. The retorts, accumulators, and microscopes of the chemist and naturalist may get out of order; the telescope and the astronomer’s horological instruments may get spoiled; our recording instruments are beyond the influence of weather or the elements.

ENQUIRER. And therefore you have implicit faith in them?

THEOSOPHIST. Faith is a word not to be found in theosophical dictionaries: we say knowledge based, on observation and experience. There is this difference, however, that while the observation and experience of physical science lead the Scientists to about as many “working” hypotheses as there are minds to evolve them, our knowledge consents to add to its lore only those facts which have become undeniable, and which are fully and absolutely demonstrated. We have no two beliefs or hypotheses on the same subject.

ENQUIRER. Is it on such data that you came to accept the strange theories we find in Esoteric Buddhism?

THEOSOPHIST. Just so. These theories may be slightly incorrect in their minor details, and even faulty in their exposition by lay students; they are facts in nature, nevertheless, and come nearer the truth than any scientific hypothesis.

ON THE SEPTENARY CONSTITUTION OF OUR PLANET

ENQUIRER. I understand that you describe our earth as forming part of a chain of earths?

THEOSOPHIST. We do. But the other six “earths” or globes, are not on the same plane of objectivity as our earth is; therefore we cannot see them.

ENQUIRER. Is that on account of the great distance?

THEOSOPHIST. Not at all, for we see with our naked eye planets and even stars at immeasurably greater distances; but it is owing to those six globes being outside our physical means of perception, or plane of being. It is not only that their material density, weight, or fabric are entirely different from those of our earth and the other known planets; but they are (to us) on an entirely different layer of space, so to speak; a layer not to be perceived or felt by our physical senses. And when I say “layer,” please do not allow your fancy to suggest to you layers like strata or beds laid one over the other, for this would only lead to another absurd misconception. What I mean by “layer” is that plane of infinite space which by its nature cannot fall under our ordinary waking perceptions, whether mental or physical; but which exists in nature outside of our normal mentality or consciousness, outside of our three dimensional space, and outside of our division of time. Each of the seven fundamental planes (or layers) in space — of course as a whole, as the pure space of Locke’s definition, not as our finite space — has its own objectivity and subjectivity, its own space and time, its own consciousness and set of senses. But all this will be hardly comprehensible to one trained in the modern ways of thought.

ENQUIRER. What do you mean by a different set of senses? Is there anything on our human plane that you could bring as an illustration of what you say, just to give a clearer idea of what you may mean by this variety of senses, spaces, and respective perceptions?

THEOSOPHIST. None; except, perhaps, that which for Science would be rather a handy peg on which to hang a counter-argument. We have a different set of senses in dream-life, have we not? We feel, talk, hear, see, taste and function in general on a different plane; the change of state of our consciousness being evidenced by the fact that a series of acts and events embracing years, as we think, pass ideally through our mind in one instant. Well, that extreme rapidity of our mental operations in dreams, and the perfect naturalness, for the time being, of all the other functions, show us that we are on quite another plane. Our philosophy teaches us that, as there are seven fundamental forces in nature, and seven planes of being, so there are seven states of consciousness in which man can live, think, remember and have his being. To enumerate these here is impossible, and for this one has to turn to the study of Eastern metaphysics. But in these two states — the waking and the dreaming — every ordinary mortal, from a learned philosopher down to a poor untutored savage, has a good proof that such states differ.

ENQUIRER. You do not accept, then, the well-known explanations of biology and physiology to account for the dream state?

THEOSOPHIST. We do not. We reject even the hypotheses of your psychologists, preferring the teachings of Eastern Wisdom. Believing in seven planes of Kosmic being and states of Consciousness, with regard to the Universe or the Macrocosm, we stop at the fourth plane, finding it impossible to go with any degree of certainty beyond. But with respect to the Microcosm, or man, we speculate freely on his seven states and principles.

ENQUIRER. How do you explain these?

THEOSOPHIST. We find, first of all, two distinct beings in man; the spiritual and the physical, the man who thinks, and the man who records as much of these thoughts as he is able to assimilate. Therefore we divide him into two distinct natures; the upper or the spiritual being, composed of three “principles” or aspects; and the lower or the physical quaternary, composed of four — in all seven.

THE SEPTENARY NATURE OF MAN.

ENQUIRER. Is it what we call Spirit and Soul, and the man of flesh?

THEOSOPHIST. It is not. That is the old Platonic division. Plato was an Initiate, and therefore could not go into forbidden details; but he who is acquainted with the archaic doctrine finds the seven in Plato’s various combinations of Soul and Spirit. He regarded man as constituted of two parts — one eternal, formed of the same essence as the Absoluteness, the other mortal and corruptible, deriving its constituent parts from the minor “created” Gods. Man is composed, he shows, of (1) A mortal body, (2) An immortal principle, and (3) A “separate mortal kind of Soul.” It is that which we respectively call the physical man, the Spiritual Soul or Spirit, and the animal Soul (the Nous andpsuche). This is the division adopted by Paul, another Initiate, who maintains that there is a psychical body which is sown in the corruptible (astral soul or body), and a spiritual body that is raised in incorruptible substance. Even James (iii. 15) corroborates the same by saying that the “wisdom” (of our lower soul) descendeth not from the above, but is terrestrial (“psychical,” “demoniacal,” vide Greek text); while the other is heavenly wisdom. Now so plain is it that Plato and even Pythagoras, while speaking but of three “principles,” give them seven separate functions, in their various combinations, that if we contrast our teachings this will become quite plain. Let us take a cursory view of these seven aspects by drawing two tables.


THEOSOPHICAL DIVISION [SANSCRIT TERMS // EXOTERIC MEANING // EXPLANATORY]

LOWER QUATERNARY

(a) Rupa, or Sthula-Sarira // Physical body // Is the vehicle of all the other “principles” during life.

(b) Prana // Life, or Vital principle // Necessary only to a, c, d, and the functions of the lower Manas, which embrace all those limited to the (physical) brain.

(c) Linga Sharira // Astral body // The Double, the phantom body.

(d) Kama rupa // The seat of animal desires and passions // This is the centre of the animal man, where lies the line of demarcation which separates the mortal man from the immortal entity.

THE UPPER IMPERISHABLE TRIAD.

(e) Manas — a dual principle in its functions // Mind, Intelligence: which is the higher human mind, whose light, or radiation links the MONAD, for the lifetime, to the mortal man // The future state and the Karmic destiny of man depend on whether Manas gravitates more downward to Kama rupa, the seat of the animal passions, or upwards to Buddhi, the Spiritual Ego. In the latter case, the higher consciousness of the individual Spiritual aspirations of mind (Manas), assimilating Buddhi, are absorbed by it and form the Ego, which goes into Devachanic bliss.*

(f) Buddhi // The Spiritual Soul // The vehicle of pure universal spirit.

(g) Atma // Spirit // One with the Absolute, as its radiation.


*In Mr. Sinnett’s “Esoteric Buddhism” d, e, and f, are respectively called the Animal, the Human, and the Spiritual Souls, which answers as well. Though the principles in Esoteric Buddhism are numbered, this is, strictly speaking, useless. The dual Monad alone (Atma-Buddhi) is susceptible of being thought of as the two highest numbers (the 6th and 7th). As to all others, since that “principle” only which is predominant in man has to be considered as the first and foremost, no numeration is possible as a general rule. In some men it is the higher Intelligence (Manas or the 5th) which dominates the rest; in others the Animal Soul (Kama-rupa) that reigns supreme, exhibiting the most bestial instincts, etc.

Now what does Plato teach? He speaks of the interior man as constituted of two parts — one immutable and always the same, formed of the same substance as Deity, and the other mortal and corruptible. These “two parts” are found in our upper Triad, and the lower Quaternary (vide Table). He explains that when the Soul, psuche, “allies herself to the Nous (divine spirit or substance) (1), she does everything aright and felicitously”; but the case is otherwise when she attaches herself to Anoia, (folly, or the irrational animal Soul). Here, then, we have Manas (or the Soul in general) in its two aspects: when attaching itself to Anoia (our Kama rupa, or the “Animal Soul” in “Esoteric Buddhism,”) it runs towards entire annihilation, as far as the personal Ego is concerned; when allying itself to the Nous (Atma-Buddhi) it merges into the immortal, imperishable Ego, and then its spiritual consciousness of the personal that was, becomes immortal.

THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN SOUL AND SPIRIT

ENQUIRER. Do you really teach, as you are accused of doing by some Spiritualists and French Spiritists, the annihilation of every personality?

THEOSOPHIST. We do not. But as this question of the duality — the individuality of the Divine Ego, and the personality of the human animal — involves that of the possibility of the real immortal Ego appearing in Seance rooms as a “materialised spirit,” which we deny as already explained, our opponents have started the nonsensical charge.

ENQUIRER. You have just spoken of psuche running towards its entire annihilation if it attaches itself to Anoia. What did Plato, and do you mean by this?

THEOSOPHIST. The entire annihilation of the personal consciousness, as an exceptional and rare case, I think. The general and almost invariable rule is the merging of the personal into the individual or immortal consciousness of the Ego, a transformation or a divine transfiguration, and the entire annihilation only of the lower quaternary . Would you expect the man of flesh, or the temporary personality, his shadow, the “astral,” his animal instincts and even physical life, to survive with the “spiritual EGO” and become sempiternal? Naturally all this ceases to exist, either at, or soon after corporeal death. It becomes in time entirely disintegrated and disappears from view, being annihilated as a whole.

ENQUIRER. Then you also reject resurrection in the flesh?

THEOSOPHIST. Most decidedly we do! Why should we, who believe in the archaic esoteric philosophy of the Ancients, accept the unphilosophical speculations of the later Christian theology, borrowed from the Egyptian and Greek exoteric Systems of the Gnostics?

ENQUIRER. The Egyptians revered Nature-Spirits, and deified even onions: your Hindus are idolaters, to this day; the Zoroastrians worshipped, and do still worship, the Sun; and the best Greek philosophers were either dreamers or materialists — witness Plato and Democritus. How can you compare!

THEOSOPHIST. It may be so in your modern Christian and even Scientific catechism; it is not so for unbiassed minds. The Egyptians revered the “One-Only-One,” as Nout; and it is from this word that Anaxagoras got his denomination Nous, or as he calls it, Nous autokrates, “the Mind or Spirit Self-potent,” the archetes kinedeos, the leading motor, or primum-mobile of all. With him the Nous was God, and the logos was man, his emanation. The Nous is the spirit (whether in Kosmos or in man), and the logos, whether Universe or astral body, the emanation of the former, the physical body being merely the animal. Our external powers perceive phenomena; our Nous alone is able to recognise their noumena. It is the logos alone, or the noumenon, that survives, because it is immortal in its very nature and essence, and the logos in man is the Eternal Ego, that which reincarnates and lasts for ever. But how can the evanescent or external shadow, the temporary clothing of that divine Emanation which returns to the source whence it proceeded, be that which is raised in incorruptibility?

ENQUIRER. Still you can hardly escape the charge of having invented a new division of man’s spiritual and psychic constituents; for no philosopher speaks of them, though you believe that Plato does.

THEOSOPHIST. And I support the view. Besides Plato, there is Pythagoras, who also followed the same idea. (2) He described the Soul as a self-moving Unit (monad) composed of three elements, the Nous (Spirit), the phren (mind), and the thumos (life, breath or the Nephesh of the Kabalists) which three correspond to our “Atma-Buddhi,” (higher Spirit-Soul), to Manas (the EGO), and to Kama-rupa in conjunction with the lower reflection of Manas. That which the Ancient Greek philosophers termed Soul, in general, we call Spirit, or Spiritual Soul, Buddhi, as the vehicle of Atma (the Agathon, or Plato’s Supreme Deity). The fact that Pythagoras and others state that phren and thumos are shared by us with the brutes, proves that in this case the lower Manasic reflection (instinct) and Kama-rupa (animal living passions) are meant. And as Socrates and Plato accepted the clue and followed it, if to these five, namely, Agathon (Deity or Atma), Psuche (Soul in its collective sense), Nous (Spirit or Mind), Phren (physical mind), and Thumos (Kama-rupa or passions) we add the eidolon of the Mysteries, the shadowy form or the human double, and the physical body, it will be easy to demonstrate that the ideas of both Pythagoras and Plato were identical with ours. Even the Egyptians held to the Septenary division. In its exit, they taught, the Soul (EGO) had to pass through its seven chambers, or principles, those it left behind, and those it took along with itself. The only difference is that, ever bearing in mind the penalty of revealing Mystery-doctrines, which was death, they gave out the teaching in a broad outline, while we elaborate it and explain it in its details. But though we do give out to the world as much as is lawful, even in our doctrine more than one important detail is withheld, which those who study the esoteric philosophy and are pledged to silence, are alone entitled to know.

THE GREEK TEACHINGS

ENQUIRER. We have magnificent Greek and Latin, Sanskrit and Hebrew scholars. How is it that we find nothing in their translations that would afford us a clue to what you say?

THEOSOPHIST. Because your translators, their great learning notwithstanding, have made of the philosophers, the Greeks especially, misty instead of mystic writers. Take as an instance Plutarch, and read what he says of “the principles” of man. That which he describes was accepted literally and attributed to metaphysical superstition and ignorance. Let me give you an illustration in point: “Man,” says Plutarch, “is compound; and they are mistaken who think him to be compounded of two parts only. For they imagine that the understanding (brain intellect) is a part of the soul (the upper Triad), but they err in this no less than those who make the soul to be a part of the body, i.e. those who make of the Triad part of the corruptible mortal quaternary. For the understanding (nous) as far exceeds the soul, as the soul is better and diviner than the body. Now this composition of the soul (psuche) with the understanding (nous) makes reason; and with the body (or thumos, the animal soul) passion; of which the one is the beginning or principle of pleasure and pain, and the other of virtue and vice. Of these three parts conjoined and compacted together, the earth has given the body, the moon the soul, and the sun the understanding to the generation of man.”

This last sentence is purely allegorical, and will be comprehended only by those who are versed in the esoteric science of correspondences and know which planet is related to every principle. Plutarch divides the latter into three groups, and makes of the body a compound of physical frame, astral shadow, and breath, or the triple lower part, which “from earth was taken and to earth returns”; of the middle principle and the instinctual soul, the second part, derived from and through and ever influenced by the moon (3); and only of the higher part or the Spiritual Soul, with the Atmic and Manasic elements in it does he make a direct emanation of the Sun, who stands here for Agathon the Supreme Deity. This is proven by what he says further as follows:

“Now of the deaths we die, the one makes man two of three and the other one of (out of) two. The former is in the region and jurisdiction of Demeter, whence the name given to the Mysteries,telein, resembled that given to death, teleutan. The Athenians also heretofore called the deceased sacred to Demeter. As for the other death, it is in the moon or region of Persephone.”

Here you have our doctrine, which shows man a septenary during life; a quintile just after death, in Kamaloka; and a threefold Ego, Spirit-Soul, and consciousness in Devachan. This separation, first in “the Meadows of Hades,” as Plutarch calls the Kama-loka, then in Devachan, was part and parcel of the performances during the sacred Mysteries, when the candidates for initiation enacted the whole drama of death, and the resurrection as a glorified spirit, by which name we mean Consciousness. This is what Plutarch means when he says: —

“And as with the one, the terrestrial, so with the other celestial Hermes doth dwell. This suddenly and with violence plucks the soul from the body; but Proserpina mildly and in a long time disjoins the understanding from the soul. (4) For this reason she is called Monogenes, only begotten, or rather begetting one alone; for the better part of man becomes alone when it is separated by her. Now both the one and the other happens thus according to nature. It is ordained by Fate (Fatum or Karma) that every soul, whether with or without understanding (mind), when gone out of the body, should wander for a time, though not all for the same, in the region lying between the earth and moon (Kamaloka). (5) For those that have been unjust and dissolute suffer then the punishment due to their offences; but the good and virtuous are there detained till they are purified, and have, by expiation, purged out of them all the infections they might have contracted from the contagion of the body, as if from foul health, living in the mildest part of the air, called the Meadows of Hades, where they must remain for a certain prefixed and appointed time. And then, as if they were returning from a wandering pilgrimage or long exile into their country, they have a taste of joy, such as they principally receive who are initiated into Sacred Mysteries, mixed with trouble, admiration, and each one’s proper and peculiar hope.”

This is Nirvanic bliss, and no Theosophist could describe in plainer though esoteric language the mental joys of Devachan, where every man has his paradise around him, erected by his consciousness. But you must beware of the general error into which too many even of our Theosophists fall. Do not imagine that because man is called septenary, then quintuple and a triad, he is a compound of seven, five, or three entities; or, as well expressed by a Theosophical writer, of skins to be peeled off like the skins of an onion. The “principles,” as already said, save the body, the life, and the astral eidolon, all of which disperse at death, are simply aspects and states of consciousness. There is but one real man, enduring through the cycle of life and immortal in essence, if not in form, and this is Manas, the Mind-man or embodied Consciousness. The objection made by the materialists, who deny the possibility of mind and consciousness acting without matter is worthless in our case. We do not deny the soundness of their argument; but we simply ask our opponents, “Are you acquainted with all the states of matter, you who knew hitherto but of three? And how do you know whether that which we refer to as ABSOLUTE CONSCIOUSNESS or Deity for ever invisible and unknowable, be not that which, though it eludes for ever our human finite conception, is still universal Spirit-matter or matter-Spirit in its absolute infinitude?” It is then one of the lowest, and in its manvantaric manifestations fractioned-aspects of this Spirit-matter, which is the conscious Ego that creates its own paradise, a fool’s paradise, it may be, still a state of bliss.

ENQUIRER. But what is Devachan?

THEOSOPHIST. The “land of gods” literally; a condition, a state of mental bliss. Philosophically a mental condition analogous to, but far more vivid and real than, the most vivid dream. It is the state after death of most mortals.

ON THE SOURCE OF THE HUMAN SOUL/THE BUDDHIST TEACHINGS ON THE ABOVE.

ON THE SOURCE OF THE HUMAN SOUL

ENQUIRER. How, then, do you account for man being endowed with a Spirit and Soul? Whence these?

THEOSOPHIST. From the Universal Soul. Certainly not bestowed by a personal God. Whence the moist element in the jelly-fish? From the Ocean which surrounds it, in which it lives and breathes and has its being, and whither it returns when dissolved.

ENQUIRER. So you reject the teaching that Soul is given, or breathed into man, by God?

THEOSOPHIST. We are obliged to. The “Soul” spoken of in ch. ii. of Genesis (v. 7) is, as therein stated, the “living Soul” or Nephesh (the vital, animal soul) with which God (we say “nature” and immutable law)endows man like every animal. Is not at all the thinking soul or mind; least of all is it the immortal Spirit.

ENQUIRER. Well, let us put it otherwise: is it God who endows man with a human rational Soul and immortal Spirit?

THEOSOPHIST. Again, in the way you put the question, we must object to it. Since we believe in no personal God, how can we believe that he endows man with anything? But granting, for the sake of argument, a God who takes upon himself the risk of creating a new Soul for every new-born baby, all that can be said is that such a God can hardly be regarded as himself endowed with any wisdom or prevision. Certain other difficulties and the impossibility of reconciling this with the claims made for the mercy, justice, equity and omniscience of that God, are so many deadly reefs on which this theological dogma is daily and hourly broken.

ENQUIRER. What do you mean? What difficulties?

THEOSOPHIST. I am thinking of an unanswerable argument offered once in my presence by a Cingalese Buddhist priest, a famous preacher, to a Christian missionary — one in no way ignorant or unprepared for the public discussion during which it was advanced. It was near Colombo, and the Missionary had challenged the priest Megattivati to give his reasons why the Christian God should not be accepted by the “heathen.” Well, the Missionary came out of that for ever memorable discussion second best, as usual.

ENQUIRER. I should be glad to learn in what way.

THEOSOPHIST. Simply this: the Buddhist priest premised by asking the padri whether his God had given commandments to Moses only for men to keep, but to be broken by God himself. The missionary denied the supposition indignantly. Well, said his opponent, “you tell us that God makes no exceptions to this rule, and that no Soul can be born without his will. Now God forbids adultery, among other things, and yet you say in the same breath that it is he who creates every baby born, and he who endows it with a Soul. Are we then to understand that the millions of children born in crime and adultery are your God’s work? That your God forbids and punishes the breaking of his laws; and that, nevertheless, he creates daily and hourly souls for just such children? According to the simplest logic, your God is an accomplice in the crime; since, but for his help and interference, no such children of lust could be born. Where is the justice of punishing not only the guilty parents but even the innocent babe for that which is done by that very God, whom yet you exonerate from any guilt himself?” The missionary looked at his watch and suddenly found it was getting too late for further discussion.

ENQUIRER. You forget that all such inexplicable cases are mysteries, and that we are forbidden by our religion to pry into the mysteries of God.

THEOSOPHIST. No, we do not forget, but simply reject such impossibilities. Nor do we want you to believe as we do. We only answer the questions you ask. We have, however, another name for your “mysteries.”

THE BUDDHIST TEACHINGS ON THE ABOVE.

ENQUIRER. What does Buddhism teach with regard to the Soul?

THEOSOPHIST. It depends whether you mean exoteric, popular Buddhism, or its esoteric teachings. The former explains itself in the Buddhist Catechism in this wise: “Soul it considers a word used by the ignorant to express a false idea. If everything is subject to change, then man is included, and every material part of him must change. That which is subject to change is not permanent, so there can be no immortal survival of a changeful thing.” This seems plain and definite. But when we come to the question that the new personality in each succeeding re-birth is the aggregate of “Skandhas,” or the attributes, of the old personality, and ask whether this new aggregation of Skandhas is a new being likewise, in which nothing has remained of the last, we read that: “In one sense it is a new being, in another it is not. During this life the Skandhas are continually changing, while the man A. B. of forty is identical as regards personality with the youth A. B. of eighteen, yet by the continual waste and reparation of his body and change of mind and character, he is a different being. Nevertheless, the man in his old age justly reaps the reward or suffering consequent upon his thoughts and actions at every previous stage of his life. So the new being of the re-birth, being the same individuality as before (but not the same personality), with but a changed form, or new aggregation of Skandhas, justly reaps the consequences of his actions and thoughts in the previous existence.” This is abstruse metaphysics, and plainly does not express disbelief in Soul by any means.

ENQUIRER. Is not something like this spoken of in Esoteric Buddhism?

THEOSOPHIST. It is, for this teaching belongs both to Esoteric Budhism or Secret Wisdom, and to the exoteric Buddhism, or the religious philosophy of Gautama Buddha.

ENQUIRER. But we are distinctly told that most of the Buddhists do not believe in the Soul’s immortality?

THEOSOPHIST. No more do we, if you mean by Soul the personal Ego, or life-Soul — Nephesh. But every learned Buddhist believes in the individual or divine Ego. Those who do not, err in their judgment. They are as mistaken on this point, as those Christians who mistake the theological interpolations of the later editors of the Gospels about damnation and hell-fire, for verbatim utterances of Jesus. Neither Buddha nor “Christ” ever wrote anything themselves, but both spoke in allegories and used “dark sayings,” as all true Initiates did, and will do for a long time yet to come. Both Scriptures treat of all such metaphysical questions very cautiously, and both, Buddhist and Christian records, sin by that excess of exotericism; the dead letter meaning far overshooting the mark in both cases.

ENQUIRER. Do you mean to suggest that neither the teachings of Buddha nor those of Christ have been heretofore rightly understood?

THEOSOPHIST. What I mean is just as you say. Both Gospels, the Buddhist and the Christian, were preached with the same object in view. Both reformers were ardent philanthropists and practical altruistspreaching most unmistakably Socialism of the noblest and highest type, self-sacrifice to the bitter end. “Let the sins of the whole world fall upon me that I may relieve man’s misery and suffering!” cries Buddha; . . . “I would not let one cry whom I could save!” exclaims the Prince-beggar, clad in the refuse rags of the burial-grounds. “Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy laden and I will give you rest,” is the appeal to the poor and the disinherited made by the “Man of Sorrows,” who hath not where to lay his head. The teachings of both are boundless love for humanity, charity, forgiveness of injury, forgetfulness of self, and pity for the deluded masses; both show the same contempt for riches, and make no difference between meum and tuum. Their desire was, without revealing to all the sacred mysteries of initiation, to give the ignorant and the misled, whose burden in life was too heavy for them, hope enough and an inkling into the truth sufficient to support them in their heaviest hours. But the object of both Reformers was frustrated, owing to excess of zeal of their later followers. The words of the Masters having been misunderstood and misinterpreted, behold the consequences!

ENQUIRER. But surely Buddha must have repudiated the soul’s immortality, if all the Orientalists and his own Priests say so!

THEOSOPHIST. The Arhats began by following the policy of their Master and the majority of the subsequent priests were not initiated, just as in Christianity; and so, little by little, the great esoteric truths became almost lost. A proof in point is, that, out of the two existing sects in Ceylon, the Siamese believes death to be the absolute annihilation of individuality and personality, and the other explains Nirvana, as we theosophists do.

ENQUIRER. But why, in that case, do Buddhism and Christianity represent the two opposite poles of such belief?

THEOSOPHIST. Because the conditions under which they were preached were not the same. In India the Brahmins, jealous of their superior knowledge, and excluding from it every caste save their own, had driven millions of men into idolatry and almost fetishism. Buddha had to give the death-blow to an exuberance of unhealthy fancy and fanatical superstition resulting from ignorance, such as has rarely been known before or after. Better a philosophical atheism than such ignorant worship for those —

“Who cry upon their gods and are not heard,

Or are not heeded —”

and who live and die in mental despair. He had to arrest first of all this muddy torrent of superstition, to uproot errors before he gave out the truth. And as he could not give out all for the same good reason as Jesus, who reminds his disciples that the Mysteries of Heaven are not for the unintelligent masses, but for the elect alone, and therefore “spake he to them in parables” (Matt. xiii. 11) — so his caution led Buddha to conceal too much. He even refused to say to the monk Vacchagotta whether there was, or was not an Ego in man. When pressed to answer, “the Exalted one maintained silence.” (5)

ENQUIRER. This refers to Gautama, but in what way does it touch the Gospels?

THEOSOPHIST. Read history and think over it. At the time the events narrated in the Gospels are alleged to have happened, there was a similar intellectual fermentation taking place in the whole civilized world, only with opposite results in the East and the West. The old gods were dying out. While the civilized classes drifted in the train of the unbelieving Sadducees into materialistic negations and mere dead-letter Mosaic form in Palestine, and into moral dissolution in Rome, the lowest and poorer classes ran after sorcery and strange gods, or became hypocrites and Pharisees. Once more the time for a spiritual reform had arrived. The cruel, anthropomorphic and jealous God of the Jews, with his sanguinary laws of “an eye for eye and tooth for tooth,” of the shedding of blood and animal sacrifice, had to be relegated to a secondary place and replaced by the merciful “Father in Secret.” The latter had to be shown, not as an extra-Cosmic God, but as a divine Saviour of the man of flesh, enshrined in his own heart and soul, in the poor as in the rich. No more here than in India, could the secrets of initiation be divulged, lest by giving that which is holy to the dogs, and casting pearls before swine, both the Revealer and the things revealed should be trodden under foot. Thus, the reticence of both Buddha and Jesus — whether the latter lived out the historic period allotted to him or not, and who equally abstained from revealing plainly the Mysteries of Life and Death — led in the one case to the blank negations of Southern Buddhism, and in the other, to the three clashing forms of the Christian Church and the 300 sects in Protestant England alone.

ON GOD AND PRAYER

ON GOD AND PRAYER

ENQUIRER. Do you believe in God?

THEOSOPHIST. That depends what you mean by the term.

ENQUIRER. I mean the God of the Christians, the Father of Jesus, and the Creator: the Biblical God of Moses, in short.

THEOSOPHIST. In such a God we do not believe. We reject the idea of a personal, or an extra-cosmic and anthropomorphic God, who is but the gigantic shadow of man, and not of man at his best, either. The God of theology, we say — and prove it — is a bundle of contradictions and a logical impossibility. Therefore, we will have nothing to do with him.

ENQUIRER. State your reasons, if you please.

THEOSOPHIST. They are many, and cannot all receive attention. But here are a few. This God is called by his devotees infinite and absolute, is he not?

ENQUIRER. I believe he is.

THEOSOPHIST. Then, if infinite — i. e., limitless — and especially if absolute, how can he have a form, and be a creator of anything? Form implies limitation, and a beginning as well as an end; and, in order to create, a Being must think and plan. How can the ABSOLUTE be supposed to think — i. e., to have any relation whatever to that which is limited, finite, and conditioned? This is a philosophical, and a logical absurdity. Even the Hebrew Kabala rejects such an idea, and therefore, makes of the one and the Absolute Deific Principle an infinite Unity called Ain-Soph. (1) In order to create, the Creator has to become active; and as this is impossible for ABSOLUTENESS, the infinite principle had to be shown becoming the cause of evolution (not creation) in an indirect way — i.e., through the emanation from itself (another absurdity, due this time to the translators of the Kabala) (2) of the Sephiroth.

ENQUIRER. How about those Kabalists, who, while being such, still believe in Jehovah, or the Tetragrammaton?

THEOSOPHIST. They are at liberty to believe in what they please, as their belief or disbelief can hardly affect a self-evident fact. The Jesuits tell us that two and two are not always four to a certainty, since it depends on the will of God to make 2 X 2 = 5. Shall we accept their sophistry for all that?

ENQUIRER. Then you are Atheists?

THEOSOPHIST. Not that we know of, and not unless the epithet of “Atheist” is to be applied to those who disbelieve in an anthropomorphic God. We believe in a Universal Divine Principle, the root of ALL, from which all proceeds, and within which all shall be absorbed at the end of the great cycle of Being.

ENQUIRER. This is the old, old claim of Pantheism. If you are Pantheists, you cannot be Deists; and if you are not Deists, then you have to answer to the name of Atheists.

THEOSOPHIST. Not necessarily so. The term “Pantheism” is again one of the many abused terms, whose real and primitive meaning has been distorted by blind prejudice and a one-sided view of it. If you accept the Christian etymology of this compound word, and form it of pan, “all,” and theos, “god,” and then imagine and teach that this means that every stone and every tree in Nature is a God or the ONE God, then, of course, you will be right, and make of Pantheists fetish-worshippers, in addition to their legitimate name. But you will hardly be as successful if you etymologise the word Pantheism esoterically, and as we do.

ENQUIRER. What is, then, your definition of it?

THEOSOPHIST. Let me ask you a question in my turn. What do you understand by Pan, or Nature?

ENQUIRER. Nature is, I suppose, the sum total of things existing around us; the aggregate of causes and effects in the world of matter, the creation or universe.

THEOSOPHIST. Hence the personified sum and order of known causes and effects; the total of all finite agencies and forces, as utterly disconnected from an intelligent Creator or Creators, and perhaps “conceived of as a single and separate force” — as in your cyclopaedias?

ENQUIRER. Yes, I believe so.

THEOSOPHIST. Well, we neither take into consideration this objective and material nature, which we call an evanescent illusion, nor do we mean by pan Nature, in the sense of its accepted derivation from the Latin Natura (becoming, from nasci, to be born). When we speak of the Deity and make it identical, hence coeval, with Nature, the eternal and uncreate nature is meant, and not your aggregate of flitting shadows and finite unrealities. We leave it to the hymn-makers to call the visible sky or heaven, God’s Throne, and our earth of mud His footstool. Our DEITY is neither in a paradise, nor in a particular tree, building, or mountain: it is everywhere, in every atom of the visible as of the invisible Cosmos, in, over, and around every invisible atom and divisible molecule; for IT is the mysterious power of evolution and involution, the omnipresent, omnipotent, and even omniscient creative potentiality.

ENQUIRER. Stop! Omniscience is the prerogative of something that thinks, and you deny to your Absoluteness the power of thought.

THEOSOPHIST. We deny it to the ABSOLUTE, since thought is something limited and conditioned. But you evidently forget that in philosophy absolute unconsciousness is also absolute consciousness, as otherwise it would not be absolute.

ENQUIRER. Then your Absolute thinks?

THEOSOPHIST. No, IT does not; for the simple reason that it is Absolute Thought itself. Nor does it exist, for the same reason, as it is absolute existence, and Be-ness, not a Being. Read the superb Kabalistic poem by Solomon Ben Jehudah Gabirol, in the Kether-Malchut, and you will understand: — “Thou art one, the root of all numbers, but not as an element of numeration; for unity admits not of multiplication, change, or form. Thou art one, and in the secret of thy unity the wisest of men are lost, because they know it not. Thou art one, and Thy unity is never diminished, never extended, and cannot be changed. Thou art one, and no thought of mine can fix for Thee a limit, or define Thee. Thou ART, but not as one existent, for the understanding and vision of mortals cannot attain to Thy existence, nor determine for Thee the where, the how and the why,” etc., etc. In short, our Deity is the eternal, incessantly evolving, not creating, builder of the universe; that universe itself unfolding out of its own essence, not being made. It is a sphere, without circumference, in its symbolism, which has but one ever-acting attribute embracing all other existing or thinkable attributes — ITSELF. It is the one law, giving the impulse to manifested, eternal, and immutable laws, within that never-manifesting, because absolute LAW, which in its manifesting periods is The ever-Becoming.

ENQUIRER. I once heard one of your members remarking that Universal Deity, being everywhere, was in vessels of dishonour, as in those of honour, and, therefore, was present in every atom of my cigar ash! Is this not rank blasphemy?

THEOSOPHIST. I do not think so, as simple logic can hardly be regarded as blasphemy. Were we to exclude the Omnipresent Principle from one single mathematical point of the universe, or from a particle of matter occupying any conceivable space, could we still regard it as infinite?

IS IT NECESSARY TO PRAY?

ENQUIRER. Do you believe in prayer, and do you ever pray?

THEOSOPHIST. We do not. We act, instead of talking.

ENQUIRER. You do not offer prayers even to the Absolute Principle?

THEOSOPHIST. Why should we? Being well-occupied people, we can hardly afford to lose time in addressing verbal prayers to a pure abstraction. The Unknowable is capable of relations only in its parts to each other, but is non-existent as regards any finite relations. The visible universe depends for its existence and phenomena on its mutually acting forms and their laws, not on prayer or prayers.

ENQUIRER. Do you not believe at all in the efficacy of prayer?

THEOSOPHIST. Not in prayer taught in so many words and repeated externally, if by prayer you mean the outward petition to an unknown God as the addressee, which was inaugurated by the Jews and popularised by the Pharisees.

ENQUIRER. Is there any other kind of prayer?

THEOSOPHIST. Most decidedly; we call it WILL-PRAYER, and it is rather an internal command than a petition.

ENQUIRER. To whom, then, do you pray when you do so?

THEOSOPHIST. To “our Father in heaven” — in its esoteric meaning.

ENQUIRER. Is that different from the one given to it in theology?

THEOSOPHIST. Entirely so. An Occultist or a Theosophist addresses his prayer to his Father which is in secret (read, and try to understand, ch. vi. v. 6, Matthew), not to an extra-cosmic and therefore finite God; and that “Father” is in man himself.

ENQUIRER. Then you make of man a God?

THEOSOPHIST. Please say “God” and not a God. In our sense, the inner man is the only God we can have cognizance of. And how can this be otherwise? Grant us our postulate that God is a universally diffused, infinite principle, and how can man alone escape from being soaked through by, and in, the Deity? We call our “Father in heaven” that deific essence of which we are cognizant within us, in our heart and spiritual consciousness, and which has nothing to do with the anthropomorphic conception we may form of it in our physical brain or its fancy: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the spirit of (the absolute) God dwelleth in you?” (3) Yet, let no man anthropomorphise that essence in us. Let no Theosophist, if he would hold to divine, not human truth, say that this “God in secret” listens to, or is distinct from, either finite man or the infinite essence — for all are one. Nor, as just remarked, that a prayer is a petition. It is a mystery rather; an occult process by which finite and conditioned thoughts and desires, unable to be assimilated by the absolute spirit which is unconditioned, are translated into spiritual wills and the will; such process being called “spiritual transmutation.” The intensity of our ardent aspirations changes prayer into the “philosopher’s stone,” or that which transmutes lead into pure gold. The only homogeneous essence, our “will-prayer” becomes the active or creative force, producing effects according to our desire.

ENQUIRER. Do you mean to say that prayer is an occult process bringing about physical results?

THEOSOPHIST. I do. Will-Power becomes a living power. But woe unto those Occultists and Theosophists, who, instead of crushing out the desires of the lower personal ego or physical man, and saying, addressing their Higher Spiritual EGO immersed in Atma-Buddhic light, “Thy will be done, not mine,” etc., send up waves of will-power for selfish or unholy purposes! For this is black magic, abomination, and spiritual sorcery. Unfortunately, all this is the favourite occupation of our Christian statesmen and generals, especially when the latter are sending two armies to murder each other. Both indulge before action in a bit of such sorcery, by offering respectively prayers to the same God of Hosts, each entreating his help to cut its enemies’ throats.

ENQUIRER. David prayed to the Lord of Hosts to help him smite the Philistines and slay the Syrians and the Moabites, and “the Lord preserved David whithersoever he went.” In that we only follow what we find in the Bible.

THEOSOPHIST. Of course you do. But since you delight in calling yourselves Christians, not Israelites or Jews, as far as we know, why do you not rather follow that which Christ says? And he distinctly commands you not to follow “them of old times,” or the Mosaic law, but bids you do as he tells you, and warns those who would kill by the sword, that they, too, will perish by the sword. Christ has given you one prayer of which you have made a lip prayer and a boast, and which none but the true Occultist understands, In it you say, in your dead-sense meaning: “Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors,” which you never do. Again, he told you to love your enemies and do good to them that hate you. It is surely not the “meek prophet of Nazareth” who taught you to pray to your “Father” to slay, and give you victory over your enemies! This is why we reject what you call “prayers.”

ENQUIRER. But how do you explain the universal fact that all nations and peoples have prayed to, and worshipped a God or Gods? Some have adored and propitiated devils and harmful spirits, but this only proves the universality of the belief in the efficacy of prayer.

THEOSOPHIST. It is explained by that other fact that prayer has several other meanings besides that given it by the Christians. It means not only a pleading or petition, but meant, in days of old, far more an invocation and incantation. The mantra, or the rhythmically chanted prayer of the Hindus, has precisely such a meaning, as the Brahmins hold themselves higher than the common devas or “Gods.” A prayer may be an appeal or an incantation for malediction, and a curse (as in the case of two armies praying simultaneously for mutual destruction) as much as for blessing. And as the great majority of people are intensely selfish, and pray only for themselves, asking to be given their “daily bread” instead of working for it, and begging God not to lead them “into temptation” but to deliver them (the memorialists only) from evil, the result is, that prayer, as now understood, is doubly pernicious: (a) It kills in man self-reliance; (b) It develops in him a still more ferocious selfishness and egotism than he is already endowed with by nature. I repeat, that we believe in “communion” and simultaneous action in unison with our “Father in secret”; and in rare moments of ecstatic bliss, in the mingling of our higher soul with the universal essence, attracted as it is towards its origin and centre, a state, called during life Samadhi, and after death, Nirvana. We refuse to pray to created finite beings — i. e., gods, saints, angels, etc., because we regard it as idolatry. We cannot pray to the ABSOLUTE for reasons explained before; therefore, we try to replace fruitless and useless prayer by meritorious and good-producing actions.

ENQUIRER. Christians would call it pride and blasphemy. Are they wrong?

THEOSOPHIST. Entirely so. It is they, on the contrary, who show Satanic pride in their belief that the Absolute or the Infinite, even if there was such a thing as the possibility of any relation between the unconditioned and the conditioned — will stoop to listen to every foolish or egotistical prayer. And it is they again, who virtually blaspheme, in teaching that an Omniscient and Omnipotent God needs uttered prayers to know what he has to do! This — understood esoterically — is corroborated by both Buddha and Jesus. The one says “seek nought from the helpless Gods — pray not! but rather act; for darkness will not brighten. Ask nought from silence, for it can neither speak nor hear.” And the other — Jesus — recommends: “Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name (that of Christos) that will I do.” Of course, this quotation, if taken in its literal sense, goes against our argument. But if we accept it esoterically, with the full knowledge of the meaning of the term, “Christos,” which to us represents Atma-Buddhi-Manas, the “SELF,” it comes to this: the only God we must recognise and pray to, or rather act in unison with, is that spirit of God of which our body is the temple, and in which it dwelleth.

PRAYER KILLS SELF-RELIANCE

ENQUIRER. But did not Christ himself pray and recommend prayer?

THEOSOPHIST. It is so recorded, but those “prayers” are precisely of that kind of communion just mentioned with one’s “Father in secret.” Otherwise, and if we identify Jesus with the universal deity, there would be something too absurdly illogical in the inevitable conclusion that he, the “very God himself” prayed to himself, and separated the will of that God from his own!

ENQUIRER. One argument more; an argument, moreover, much used by some Christians. They say, “I feel that I am not able to conquer any passions and weaknesses in my own strength. But when I pray to Jesus Christ I feel that he gives me strength and that in His power I am able to conquer.”

THEOSOPHIST. No wonder. If “Christ Jesus” is God, and one independent and separate from him who prays, of course everything is, and must be possible to “a mighty God.” But, then, where’s the merit, or justice either, of such a conquest? Why should the pseudo-conqueror be rewarded for something done which has cost him only prayers? Would you, even a simple mortal man, pay your labourer a full day’s wage if you did most of his work for him, he sitting under an apple tree, and praying to you to do so, all the while? This idea of passing one’s whole life in moral idleness, and having one’s hardest work and duty done by another — whether God or man — is most revolting to us, as it is most degrading to human dignity.

ENQUIRER. Perhaps so, yet it is the idea of trusting in a personal Saviour to help and strengthen in the battle of life, which is the fundamental idea of modern Christianity. And there is no doubt that, subjectively, such belief is efficacious; i. e., that those who believe do feel themselves helped and strengthened.

THEOSOPHIST. Nor is there any more doubt, that some patients of “Christian” and “Mental Scientists” — the great Deniers” (4) — are also sometimes cured; nor that hypnotism, and suggestion, psychology, and even mediumship, will produce such results, as often, if not oftener. You take into consideration, and string on the thread of your argument, successes alone. And how about ten times the number of failures? Surely you will not presume to say that failure is unknown even with a sufficiency of blind faith, among fanatical Christians?

ENQUIRER. But how can you explain those cases which are followed by full success? Where does a Theosophist look to for power to subdue his passions and selfishness?

THEOSOPHIST. To his Higher Self, the divine spirit, or the God in him, and to his Karma. How long shall we have to repeat over and over again that the tree is known by its fruit, the nature of the cause by its effects? You speak of subduing passions, and becoming good through and with the help of God or Christ. We ask, where do you find more virtuous, guiltless people, abstaining from sin and crime, in Christendom or Buddhism — in Christian countries or in heathen lands? Statistics are there to give the answer and corroborate our claims. According to the last census in Ceylon and India, in the comparative table of crimes committed by Christians, Mussulmen, Hindoos, Eurasians, Buddhists, etc., etc., on two millions of population taken at random from each, and covering the misdemeanours of several years, the proportion of crimes committed by the Christian stands as 15 to 4 as against those committed by the Buddhist population. (Vide Lucifer for April, 1888, p. 147, Art. Christian lecturers on Buddhism.) No Orientalist, no historian of any note, or traveller in Buddhist lands, from Bishop Bigandet and Abbe Huc, to Sir William Hunter and every fair-minded official, will fail to give the palm of virtue to Buddhists before Christians. Yet the former (not the true Buddhist Siamese sect, at all events) do not believe in either God or a future reward, outside of this earth. They do not pray, neither priests nor laymen. “Pray!” they would exclaim in wonder, “to whom, or what?”

ENQUIRER. Then they are truly Atheists.

THEOSOPHIST. Most undeniably, but they are also the most virtue-loving and virtue-keeping men in the whole world. Buddhism says: Respect the religions of other men and remain true to your own; but Church Christianity, denouncing all the gods of other nations as devils, would doom every non-Christian to eternal perdition.

ENQUIRER. Does not the Buddhist priesthood do the same?

THEOSOPHIST. Never. They hold too much to the wise precept found in the DAMMAPADA to do so, for they know that, “If any man, whether he be learned or not, consider himself so great as to despise other men, he is like a blind man holding a candle — blind himself, he illumines others.”