stanza 2, slokas 1-2

STANZA II.
1. . . . Where were the builders, the luminous sons of Manvantaric dawn? . . . In the unknown darkness in their Ah-hi Paranishpanna. The producers of form from no-form—the root of the world—the Devamatri and Svâbhâvat, rested in the bliss of non-being.
2. . . . Where was silence? Where the ears to sense it? No, there was neither silence nor sound; naught save ceaseless eternal breath, which knows itself not.

 

“Mr. A. Keightley:  Stanza 2.  In reference to what is said on page 54 of oxygen and hydrogen combining to form water, would it really be correct to say that what we perceive is, in reality, a different “element”, if the same substance?

 
For example, when a substance is in the gaseous state, it is the element of air which is perceived; and when combined to form water, oxygen and hydrogen appear under the guise of the element of water.

 
Would it be correct to say that when we get it in the solid state – ice – we then perceive the element of earth? Would a clairvoyant perceive oxygen and hydrogen separately in the water?

 
Mme. Blavatsky:  There are two or three things I do not recognize at all. It must be Mr. Harte (Richard Harte) , who has put his finger in the pie. You remember at the beginning you wanted to make it more plain, and I have been crossing it out as much as I could. I can recognize in a minute what is mine and what is not. He begins to make comparisons, and I don’t see at all the object of the comparison. I think it is all correlations, and I don’t see how we can say this or the other.

 
They have made a most absurd objection to calling the earth and water and fire and air elements, because they say they are composed of elements. Now they begin to find out that they do not approach even to an element in their chemical analysis, and that such a thing as an element can only exist in their imagination. They cannot get at an element which is really an element. Do what they will, they will find more and more that the element of today will become the two elements of tomorrow.

 
This is a world of differentiation; therefore, if we call water an element, we have a perfect right to do so, because it is an element. It is something which does not resemble anything else, it is not like fire or air or earth. These are all the states of one and the same element, if you like, of the one element in Nature. These are various manifestations in various aspects, but to our perceptions they are elements.

 
Now they go and quarrel: “Shall we call it an element?” and then they say that oxygen and hydrogen do not exist any more, since they have correlated and become something else; but if you go and decompose water, immediately you have the two elements reappearing, Do they pretend to create something out of nothing?

 
Mr. B. Keightley:  No, they say they do not understand.

 
Mme. Blavatsky:  It proves that they are latent, and it is a fallacy to say they do not exist. They disappear from our plane of perception, from our senses and sight, but they are there. There is not a single thing that exists that can go out of the universe.”

 

H. P. Blavatsky

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s