Chakras and the Third Eye myth

Discussion in 'Religion, Beliefs and Spirituality' started by MelT, Mar 26, 2009.

  1. #1 MelT, Mar 26, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 26, 2009
    It's no-one's fault that so many myths about meditation, chakras and the like are propagated, the whole field is a co-dependent web of half-truths and wrong meanings that will deceive most people who don't have the opportunity to research the facts.

    The 'third eye' is a perfect example; yes, it's certainly written about, particularly here in the West, but it doesn't have any history at all in Buddhism and Hinduism – the traditions that the idea is meant to have been taken from - and it's actually a Western invention, conceived within the last hundred years. There are, of course, many meditation methods that do focus on the brow chakra (Ajna), and these work very well, but it's never called the 'third eye' in authentic traditions, and it's not a requirement that you must open it before you can reach enlightenment.

    In traditional texts, chakras aren't associated with the wealth of character information, sounds, emotions, auras, or hardly anything else that New Age literature, now claiming to divulge 'ancient methods', says about them. There are no incenses, emotions, planets, crystals or metals associated with them; there's no 'opening' chakras, and nor is the third eye found in Aikido or karate, as is often claimed; and although again the Ajna is sometimes used in Zen, it isn't the 'third eye' or the main focus of practice. In fact, Zen places the 'vital energy centre' (the Hara) in the abdomen, which is considered to be the seat of the heart-body-mind.

    There's certainly a lot of symbolism regarding this point on the forehead in the East, though none of it relates to a 'third eye'. In Buddhism, some statues of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas from the second and third centuries wear an 'urna', a concave circular dot sometimes shown as a jewel, which is an auspicious mark made by a whorl of white hair on the forehead between the eyebrows of an enlightened being.

    The closest we can get to opening anything is in Shivaism, one of the earliest Indian denominations, dating back to the first centuries BC. Here at least we find reference to an eye, as the Shivaite term 'Udvamanti' literally means 'opening of the eye', as a name for the emergence of infinite consciousness in a meditator, gained by his or her focus on their inner consciousness, recognising the two to be one and the same. But, ask any traditional practitioner of Shivaism about the pineal and the idea of opening a third eye and he will no doubt laugh heartily.

    So where did the 'third eye' concept first begin?

    The eighteenth-century philosopher Rene Descartes spent many hours studying the pineal gland, trying to deduce its effects, and he called it 'the seat of the soul', a point of connection between mind and body. His reason for believing this was that he saw it as being unique in the human brain, in that it didn't appear to be duplicated in its right and left sides. However, with the aid of modern microscopes we can see that it is in fact divided into two hemispheres.

    Probably the first person to use the term 'third eye', and also to use it in reference to the pineal gland, was the scientist Nils Holmgren, in 1918. Holmgren coined the term after examining the pineal glands of frogs and dogfish sharks (but not people) and discovering cells on the tip of the gland that looked like retinal cone cells, which is in no way saying that the organ had any kind of a spiritual connection as a 'third eye'.

    However, a few years before Holmgren the Victorian 'Theosophical Society' had decided that the pineal gland was not just important, as Descartes had thought, but that it was the key to spiritual awakening. All well and good - but for anyone not familiar with Theosophy, it's worth bearing in mind that its co-founder, H.P.Blavatsky, is the source of many of today's 'occult' myths, such as Ascended Masters, astral travel, the aura, seven planes of reality, the evolution of consciousness, the third eye, the Akashic Record, remote viewing, the 'silver cord' in OOBEs, Atlantis, Lemuria ('Mu') and a whole host of other things which she claimed to have been told by her very own 'Ascended Masters', via letters that floated down from heaven onto the tables around which she held seances.

    Sadly for Blavatsky, an over-eager aide at one such seance opened a secret panel in which the pre-written letters, later to be revealed, were placed, thus giving the game away – and all in the presence of paranormal investigators who were there to scrutinise her dealings. Blavatsky was an opportunistic fraud and not a very good one.

    Although Blavatsky claimed that her work was, in large part, channelled from great spiritual masters (such as Jesus) in the beyond, it is unfortunate that they didn't seem as interested in peace and tolerance as we would have expected, but instead seemed to support Theosophy's racist ideals. Blavatsky's book, 'The Secret Doctrine', uses a variety of derogatory terms for Africans and other ethnic groups, such as the “degenerate descendants of the Atlanteans”; saying that the, “yellow, red, brown, and black races are abject and savage”, whereas “the Aryan race” represents “the apex of physical and intellectual evolution.” Other Theosophists who came after Blavatsky were also keen to promote its racist, anti-Semitic thrust, in part to help justify Europe's brutal colonisation of Africa, India and the Far East.

    Theosophy and its beliefs spread quickly, not just amongst the American and English ex-patriots in India, but also to a variety of Indian thinkers; and sadly too, to a variety of charlatans who wanted to get in on the popularity that the Hindu faith and all things Eastern were accruing in the West, where support for Blavatsky was easy to court. It was good business sense for Theosophical beliefs to be taken on by local teachers - and ancient Hindu knowledge, gained over thousands of years of insight and direct experience, was left behind for much more attractive (and easier to practise) forms of spirituality and meditation; sadly, these were invented by Blavatsky, Olcott and others, mere months before. The respected Swami Sivananda, for instance, read many Theosophical works, and its terminology is found throughout his writings as the alternative translation of Sanskrit words, giving Theosophy a provenance that it does not deserve.

    According to Blavatsky, after man developed through a series of 'Root races' over some 3 billion years (including stages where he was variously boneless, four-armed, three-eyed, or even one-eyed) his 'third eye' retreated into the lower centre of his brain, resulting in the loss of his spiritual capabilities.

    "...The “deva eye” exists no more for the majority of mankind. The third eye is dead, and acts no longer; but it has left behind a witness to its existence. This witness is now the pineal gland..."

    "...The double-faced became the one-faced, and the eye was drawn deep into the head and is now buried under the hair. During the activity of the inner man (during trances and spiritual visions) the eye swells and expands.

    Trying to sum up Blavatsky's entire, tortuous explanation of the growth and loss of our 'third eye' would take far more room than I'd like to give it here so, for those interested parties, take a look at HPB's 'Secret Doctrine', Volume 2, pages 289 to 298 for more details

    Leadbeater and Chakras
    One of Blavatsky's followers, an English clergyman called Reverend C. W. Leadbeater, is responsible for a good deal of the distorted ideas about chakras that we now have in the West. Leadbeater claimed not only to be able to enter the so-called 'astral plane' at will, but also to have suddenly one day gained the ability to examine every one of a person's 'former incarnations' in detail - without, as he said himself, having any previous experience of doing so before. Leadbeater also claimed that not only was he himself an incarnation of the legendary King Asoka of India (who was responsible for the adoption of Buddhism in India in the second century), but also King Gashtasp of Persia, who “upheld the mission of the Zoroasterian religion.”

    But, surely those academics of the time who were aware of the real chakra systems were up in arms about Leadbeater's invention and were quick to decry it? Absolutely: in his book, 'Kundalini, The Mother of the Universe' (1930), Rishi Singh Gherwal writes:

    "...The harm to Yoga philosophy that has been done by misinformation thru the "Theosophist" Rev. C. W. Leadbeater is indeed very great. Most readers of Theosophical and Occult literature believe Rev. Leadbeater to be a friend to the Hindus, but after reading his books, "The Inner Life" and "The Chakras", I am forced to say by the information he has given, he is the greatest enemy of Yoga philosophy, and has given a bad name to Yoga."

    But despite this and other protestations over the last hundred years or so, Leadbeater's system survives and still influences New Age authors the world over today.

    The final 'proof' of the third eye concept was given to us in the 1950s by Lobsang Rampa. Rampa was allegedly a Buddhist monk, whose book 'The Third Eye' gave post-war Europe a whole new interest in the occult and meditation, with his stories of life in a Tibetan monastery. Sadly, eventually it was discovered that the author was in fact one Cyril Henry Hoskin, born in Devon, England, the son of a plumber. When confronted with the truth Hoskin wasn’t at all phased, but claimed that although he may have been born Cyril Henry Hoskin, his body had been taken over by Rampa’s spirit. So, according to him, all the information he had written was true.

    Obviously, in light of the above we all have to be very careful when we read modern accounts of subjects like the above and accept them as true.

    MelT

     
  2. While chakras and especially the third eye were nowhere near as over-celebrated as by new age philosophies, and were certainly not "balanced, healing" and such, the ajna being the third eye isnt in fact all that uncommon of a notion in Hinduism, and especially, as you mentioned, with Shaivites.

    You will find many a sadhu even today who works on the third eye, who will put their thumb on your third eye and energize it.

    As for it coinciding with the pineal gland, it is obviously new age, for the pineal gland was only discovered recently.

    The chakras and their functions, their relation to our emotional and physical health, is mostly a new age concept. However, there were generalized relationships - the mooladhara being the seat of the self and the kundalini shakti, the ajna being the third eye, although as you said, opening it, "seeing through it", etc, were never emphasized, the sahasara being the most subtle chakra and the gateway to divinity, all existed as concepts since the conception of the concept. Diksha was always given in the form of energizing the sahasara or ajna chakra, and in the latter days and today diksha is also given by energizing the heart.

    While chakras were not celebrated or indulged in anywhere near the way they are today, they did have subtle defined functions even then, and the notion of a third eye, while not centric to text, does indeed date back quite far and was not an uncommon notion at all in practice, and still isnt.
     


  3. The Shiavite 'connection; isn't one, see above - and the introduction of the third eye into Hindu lore took place after 1890, there was no mention of it as a term before then within Hinduism. Hinduism was two thousand years without a third eye, one hundred years with. It is now common for the reasons stated above. If you should find any mention of it before then there are many scholars, both Buddhist and Hindu, who would be interested in your findings. There is the Ajna, of course; but as a third eye, not at all. And remember too that we're not simply talking about the 'third eye'as being representative of the Ajna, but also that it's alleged connection to the pineal is spurious and modern.



    The 'seat of the self' and the most important chakra varies, depending on the form of Tantra you practise, again as I said. The ideas now currently accepted as being the actions of chakras, their shape, size and position were not present at the beginning of the concept, hence the post above. The single original system split into factions over a period of a thousand years, slowly developing differences that are still present today. You will be hard pushed to find anyone truly practising with chakras in the original sense.



    There are many, many kinds of Diksha, all with different purposes. It's used sometimes, not 'always', to energise chakras, yes certainly, no quibble there (though usually only six chakras are thought of in chakra Jagran Diksha, not seven or four as in other branches of Tantra).



    Once again, although there certainly is use of the Anja dating back to the earliest usage, there is no mention of the third eye in this context at all until Theosophy. Nothing, apart from the slight word connection in Shivaism.

    I do understand that as you said, you haven't researched this, but should you do so I would be very interested to see any mentions you should find of the third eye in Hinduism or Buddhism in the spiritual context used today before 1890 (forgetting Descartes).


    MelT
     
  4. As I mentioned in the previous post, there is no mention in the texts. Religion and spirituality might derive from texts, but are in the living and not in the texts. Word of mouth along thousands of generations and the non-written knowledge of Hinduism indicate that, while not dating all the way back to the origin, the concept of the ajna as a third eye dates much furhter back than this century. Scholars tend to remain scholarly and assimilate massive intellectual knowledge. In Hinduism such people are called Pundits. True experiential spirituality lies dormant within them as they confine themselves to the texts. The texts are invaluable, but they are invaluable to something infinitely more invaluable - living experience.


    The purpose of diksha was not usually to energize the chakra, but the purpose of the diksha was acheived through the energization of the chakra.
     
  5. I say again, if you have any evidence for your claim that the third eye predates 1890 then please show it.

    I'm very aware of both Buddhist and Hindu oral traditions and what they contain, as I've studied them and been taught them for much of my adult life. My first dealings with spirituality was through just such a tradition - I spend much of my time in India. There is no oral tradition at all in India concerning the third eye that dates to before 1890. If you have proof of one, please present it here and I will be more than happy.


    MelT
     
  6. I say again, I have no evidence that can be communicated by means of textual evidence. Mine too is word of mouth upon the meeting of sages. However, my experience seems to differ in that the concept of the Third Eye dates to around Shaivisim. Shaivites every since have carried this notion, and there are and have always been carrying it. Although my experiences and sources might be incorrect, and yours correct.
     
  7. #7 MelT, Mar 27, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 27, 2009



    It has no history in Shivaism at all unfortunately.

    I appreciate your honesty, I hope I can therefore add to your knowledge. Yet again I'm sorry that this should be so long. I began with Indian Tantra in the form of Shivaism (with a slight leaning towards Vishnuism), and currently practice the Tibetan version, so I can easily point you to relevant texts. There is no third-eye anywhere in the oral or written traditions of Tantra or Shivaite tradition; it's simple to prove textually because we have all of the texts of Tantra to look at any time we choose; orally, there is no evidence in any area of India or Swat that there is an exclusive off-shoot to the tradition which contains the third-eye.

    The Vedas - the very first texts on chakras and meditation anywhere in the World - began as an oral tradition that goes back to at least 1,500 BC, with a codified written text appearing about 350 BC. I and tens of other people (both for and against the idea of the third eye) have trawled the Vedas and it's family off-shoots and sub-schools in search of any reference to it and there is nothing that comes close. The reason why so many people have put so much time and effort into finding some hitherto unknown oral tradition (I've searched for it myself for 20 years, others much longer) where the third eye might appear, again because of Theosophy.

    Remembering that Blavatsky was not only caught out as a fraud three times (once actually forging one of the 'channeled' letters she said she received), and that she has been proven wrong on the origination and evolution of man, cosmology, science, and is also alarmingly racist and anti-Semitic, she also came up with the idea that there was a 'mystery language' used by Masters, and a secret book where any true seeker could find proof of all the things she said about chakras and the third eye. The book she said was extant in every family home in Tibet and well-known by everyone. No such book has ever been known to any Tibetan and no evidence at all of the mystery language has ever been found.

    Blavatsky's/Leadbeater's chakra system is called the 'secondary chakras', and traditional tantra, 'primary chakras'. They differ in many ways, for example (I've taken these quotes from entirely neutral sites):

    "...The secondary chakras are the chakras described by Theosophy, the New Age movement, Christopher Hills, Barbara Brennan, and many others. Unlike the archetypal Primary chakras they have a specific form (usually described as vortexes of energy), colour and a specific precise location in the auric bodies (although these qualities will vary according to the individual)..."

    "...A distinction has to be made between primary and secondary chakras, as these are very often confused. The primary chakras are the inner chakras, i.e. the chakras as described by the original Tantra (essentially Yoga and/or Hindu traditions), which can only be accessed through yogic practice. These chakras are archetypal and do not have a form; the form they are represented as in Tantric literature is stylized and symbolic...."...We will call this one the “Primary” chakra system, as it is known. For the sake of clarity and dispelling some confusion, we will make a simple “comparison” of this system with the one most commonly known in the West, which we can generically describe as the “New Age” chakra system, since there are an infinite number of names and variations of this one as well. We will call this one the “Secondary” chakra system, as this appears to be the accepted term.
    "..For the sake of clarity, since these two systems APPEAR to be similar in “location” and “number of chakras”, the following table illustrates the rough equivalence of the two.Please remember that the two systems refer to entirely different philosophies, objectives and methods, so they are not really “equivalent”. As you can see, it is easy to “equate” the two systems, believing that just the names of the Chakras change, but they are quite different in philosophy, objectives and methods of accessing or "opening" them..."


    People have been up in arms about the Theosophical system since it was first published, and it still holds sway here in the west, but, original it's not. I'm happy to help anyone with Tantra (Vedic or Tibetan), it canbe a bit of a minefield.
    MelT
     
  8. Reality. You can see the depression where the third eye is in the forehead of a strong and healthy human being.

    I got loads of example pictures around here somewhere. Maybe if I feel motivated I will post one for you.

    Clear eye shaped depression right above and in the middle of the other two eyes. Can't miss it.
     
  9. My penis is my third eye, so yes, it's real.
     
  10. "Various types of lower vertebrates, such as reptiles and amphibians, can actually sense light via a third parietal eye-a structure associated with the pineal gland-which serves to regulate their circadian rhythms."

    How come the third eye, or an energy centre at the place thereof, is referred to by several religions and practices? Even in between ones that have no historical connection?
     
  11. #11 MelT, Aug 19, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 19, 2009


    Sorry, I missed this one. Being light-sensitive through the parietal eye has no connection at all with the concept of the Third Eye in the spiritual sense.



    There is no doubt that there is a chakra at the brow, but again it has no connection to the pineal, or the Third Eye, as described in Western Occultism (Theosophy). This connection was made solely by Theosophy, and it is the source of tens of myths that we in the west still believe in today concerning chakras. It's a bit of a giveaway when our modern chakra system in the west bears very little resemblance to that of the East, and that the man who invented our western chakra system (Olcott) had no experience of meditation, or knowledge of the true, original system - and yet invented it in a matter of weeks, whilst at the same time allegedly learning how to see atoms, travel astrally to any time or place, connect with Jesus and any other person he desired, all with no previous abilities.

    The Third Eye really doesn't appear in any form of ancient tradition before 1890 and the writings of HP Blavatsky. That it did become widespread as an idea and became reabsorbed into some traditions is an unfortunate effect of the fame of Theosophy in the Victorian era. It doesn't exist, as described, anywhere in Hinduism or Buddhism, which Blavatsky claimed it did.


    MelT
     
  12. Hi MelT:
    I stumbled across your post about the Third Eye, and thought it may be useful to give you a bit of information. First, please go read the Siva Samhita, Chapter 5, verse 45. This was probably written in the 15th century, and more than one translation agree on their use of 'the Third Eye.' Any real Yogi can speak with authority on this (difficult to find a real yogi in USA), as well as any Zen Master. There is in fact an amazing center of consciousness we have, physically located just above the center of the eyebrows, in the center of the head. It is not just a 'third eye,' but even awareness must be described somehow... and 'seeing' is easy to understand. I urge you to practice yoga or Zen, and you will also know what is meant in the Bible when they say, 'You will be given the Morning Star.'
    Very best wishes,
    Will ~
     
  13. Ps:
    My teacher's teacher was Rishi Singh Gherwal, and I have most of his books. Privately printed, and meant really only for his students, they stand as a great reference to anyone seriously interested in success in yoga. Rishi was a very accomplished yogi, who taught in his ashram in Santa Barbara from about 1920 to 1965, when he passed. If you are interested, I will provide you with pdf versions of Rishi's books.
    Best,
    Will ~
     
  14. First, please go read the Siva Samhita, Chapter 5, verse 45. This was probably written in the 15th century, and more than one translation agree on their use of 'the Third Eye.'

    I'm very familiar with it, and its many variants. There are translations based on translations, and the use of the term - when it's present in some copies - in no way coincides with the Theosophical meaning of the term. In the most recent translation by James Mallinson, the most important and purest for over eighty years, there is no Third Eye as it's meant in the West at all.

    As I said above, the Theosophical third eye found its way back into Hindu thought and was incorporated into it around a hundred and ten years ago, when Hindu translators were keen to represent what they believed in western terms to make it more accessible to westerners. I've seen texts from the TM foundation and the Krishna groups where they talk about a third eye, but their meaning is not at all the same as the original idea within Shivaism, but it is very like Theosophy. The third eye in Shivaism is representative of different understandings entirely.

    Any real Yogi can speak with authority on this (difficult to find a real yogi in USA), as well as any Zen Master.

    It isn't the case that 'any real yogi/zen master' will talk about the third eye. In twenty five years study as a serious meditator, sixteen as a Buddhist, with the first couple of years in Shivaism, in fact all masters I've met (both Tibetan and Hindu) have ridiculed the western system of chakras and the third eye relentlessly, which is why I post about it here. The form of Buddhism I practise is Tantra, with many nods to this very text.

    There are forms of Hatha yoga now that are so far removed from their original meaning and practises that they're pretty much solely representative of Theosophy, and not Hindu thought at all. If you meet any master who claims to be teaching you to open your third eye, he or she is following the Western Occult system of chakras, not the original.

    "...For the sake of clarity and dispelling some confusion, we will make a simple “comparison” of this system with the one most commonly known in the West, which we can generically describe as the “New Age” chakra system..We will call this one the “Secondary” chakra system, as this appears to be the accepted term...Please remember that the two systems refer to entirely different philosophies, objectives and methods, so they are not really “equivalent”. As you can see, it is easy to “equate” the two systems, believing that just the names of the Chakras change, but they are quite different in philosophy, objectives and methods of accessing or "opening" them..."

    Regarding the text itself:


    The Siva Samhita: "The earliest known English translation is by Shri Chandra Vasu (1884, Lahore) in the series known as "The Sacred Books of the Hindus" The translation by Rai Bahadur and Srisa Chandra Vasu in 1914, also in the series known as "The Sacred Books of the Hindus", was the first translation to find a global audience. However, it omits certain sections (such as vajroli mudra) and is considered inaccurate by some. In 2007, James Mallinson made a new translation to address these issues.The new translation is based on the only available critical edition of the text - the one publIshed in 1999 by the Kaivalya Dham Yoga Research Institute."

    James Mallinson's version of the text is the only one that interprets the original text without change or bias, and is now the standard work for all keen students. He has also taken pains to point out the problems with such an undertaking and that, as in some places the texts are contradictory and contain many later additions, even this translation isn't complete. However, he and his predecessor's checked several thousand variant readings of this text to arrive at a much more accurate translation. You might want to check out an excerpt at: http://yogavidya.com/Yoga/ShivaSamhita.pdf..."

    The full text contains no mention at all of a Third Eye, or concepts that would lead you to believe that the text is talking about the western idea of the same. Remember that this text is the first to try to translate this text exactly as it was originally. The original simply calls it the 'Eye of Shiva'. Note that, unlike Theosophy, even here it isn't opened, and has no similarities to the WO version at all. It's also not inside the head, again a theosophical claim, but actually on the forehead. Remember too that this isn't the main chakra, as beleived by Theosophists.

    Just as an exercise, take any one of Mallinson's translated verses and compare it to the many texts now claiming to be authentic Khundalini, very 'eye-opening':)

    I urge you to practice yoga or Zen,

    Zen was derived from the tradition I practise.

    and you will also know what is meant in the Bible when they say, 'You will be given the Morning Star.'

    I don't believe that the bible contains any reference to the third eye of Theosophy or Hinduism. I appreciate that you may believe that, but I've seen no evidence of it personally.

    MelT
     
  15. I would be very interested to read in them where Gherwal says that he agrees with Theosophy, as Gherwal was one of the main protestors at the Western Occult/Theosophical ideas of both their chakra system and their third-eye concept, whcih he disagreed with vehemently:

    These are his words concerning this subject:

    "...The harm to Yoga philosophy that has been done by misinformation thru the "Theosophist" Rev. C. W. Leadbeater is indeed very great. Most readers of Theosophical and Occult literature believe Rev. Leadbeater to be a friend to the Hindus, but after reading his book, "The Inner Life" and "The Chakras", I am forced to say by the information he has given, he is the greatest enemy of Yoga philosophy, and has given a bad name to Yoga..."

    MelT
     
  16. Thanks for posting this MeLT
    good read
     
  17. MelT, what do you know about the third eye and pinecone imagery in various religions?
     
  18. #18 MelT, Apr 7, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 7, 2010


    Much:) Simply look first at the sources who say that this is so. Also take into account that it would be strange if the pinecone (some say pineapple) be an ancient representative symbol of something that didn't acquire today's esoteric meaning until about 1894 with Theosophy. If the ancient east, the alleged source of the Third Eye, doesn't mention such symbolism in their thousands of texts then you have to doubt the plausibility of the idea. Remember, this is something that's alleged to be a part of almost every chakra system in the east, but isn't, except in the west where we have Theosophy to mis-guide us. No serious text without Theosophical links ever talks about the Third Eye.

    There are a number of books that make the claim - without any kind of real foundation - that the pinecone must be the pineal (barring shape), and yet not one of the sources says why it should be the case? Which eastern religion, the source of chakras, talks about this link?

    The lovely Mr Icke, Micheal Tsarion and Melchizedek continually quote the 'fact' that the pinecone is a key Masonic symbol, when in fact it isn't, and you would be hard pushed to find it used as anything more than decorative purposes in any lodge. My Mother was one of the few female Master Masons and head of her lodge, but she has never heard of its use in a symbolic way, anywhere.

    The trouble is that the pinecone became a popular decorative shape in the UK from about 1780 onwards, used on furniture, porcelain and internal decor'. It's not really viable to think that all those who have used it are doing so in any esoteric context. It's a pleasing, symmetrical shape.

    Could you tell me who you're quoting as being the source of this idea? It's something that's been spread over the 'net by a variety of followers of the FOl symbolism, but none of them says who actually said that the pinecone is the pineal?

    MelT
     


  19. That is a fantastic piece of work there MelT. I could not agree with you more. Blavatsky was a total charlatan and a fraud. Sadly her works became enormously influential on numerous other influential people such as Annie Bassett, Hitler, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and of course Aleister Crowley.

    Her works are clearly the foundation of Nazism. She also influenced Alice Bailey who's channellings and teachings have become the foundation of the World Core Corruclium and the New Age spirituality that the United Nations is promoting.

    These bizarre occult teachings are everywhere and underlie everything in our modern society. This third eye BS is very related to the fraud that is 2012, UFO's and Panspermia.

    I don't see how anyone could fail to realize that Disney, Art Bell and the History Channel are blantent psy-op propaganda aimed at influencing people's world views and behaviors. The obvious purpose being the guiding of mankind's evolution.

    The people who run society look upon mankind as just another animal and they believe that all domesticated animals belongs in a fenced in, highly controlled area. Wild animals roam free but man is not a wild animal.

    This is why we see the constant push for globalism and a new world religion. This is why we see the movement toward a cashless society.

    This is why we are witnessing the phasing out of 'exclusive' religious beliefs such as true Christianity.

    It is a slow dance but they are building it one fence post at a time.

    World Vision: Global Education

    Lucis Trust, Alice Bailey & World Goodwill

     

  20. :bongin:






    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page