I could have put this in any of several HP forums, but since scientific minds tend to avoid the historical facts about Saint Germain, I thought I'd place it here.
Here we have a man who was mature by the opening of the 1700s, yet never appeared to age over well over a century. He was known to the royal houses of Europe, and warned Marie Antoinette about the coming French Revolution. He could speak every single language, it seems, including Oriental ones. He was a superb musician. Masons with deep knowledge believe he was either the founder, or much behind the scenes, in Rosicrucianism and Freemasonry in the beginning. Manley Palmer Hall believes Saint Germain had more than anyone else to do with the American Revolution.
He could write a poem with one hand while writing a letter with the other! He could turn flawed gems into perfect ones. He invented steam engines 20 years before Stevenson's Rocket...
Saint Germain never appeared to eat, or very little oatmeal according to some. He was enormously wealthy but had no bank acount and usually no obvious income. He acted as a diplomat or even spy over many decades for many countries. Though well-known in Europe, he was also with Clive of India in the 1850s (1750s?). Voltaire knew him and called him, "The man who never dies, and who knows everything." The opera singer, Emma Calve, was visited by him in 1897 and signed a phtograph for him, saying he had dispensed wonderful wisdom. His musical compositions are in museums around the world, and sometimes are recorded. He wrote at least one book, "Most Holy Trinosophia".
Since he was a grown man from around 1700, and still not aged by 1897 -- how? Many claim to have met him even up to the present day, and there are many such published accounts of meetings with him in the 20th century. People have known him throughout their lives, from their childhood to old age, but he does not age. He walked at will throughout the courts of Europe, in which everyone seems to have known him. When it was once attempted, he proved somehow impossible to arrest.
If this man isn't a mystery, what is?
The historical records are unquestionable, rom the letters and diaries of royalty and others of the day over centuries. He did exist. I've often noted how sceptics simply avoid looking at this subject, or throw out superficial answers without checking that well-known personages of the day attest to Saint Germain's longevity, during which his appearance didn't even alter. It's an interesting case given all the evidence.
It's said, "To know him is to love him."
One of hundreds of links is:
[DLMURL] http://theosophy.org/tlodocs/teachers/SaintGermain.htm [/DLMURL]
Venetian
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Thanks very much for this, it is alwayse a good thing to read and understand more about St Germain. I admire him very much.
Is he one of your guides?
If so I would love to know more as Iknow St germain is my *Higher* guide one I feel very blessed in having around me.
Love and Blessings
Ithar:)
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Hi Ithar,
I wouldn't quite call Saint Germain a 'guide' of mine as that isn't my background (spiritualism). It's also the Science forum so I'm keeping that in mind! 😀 But many believe he's well-worth heeding if you get the chance. 😉
There's an account by Leadbeater who met Saint Germain in Rome about a century ago "as if by chance". (Meaning Saint Germain made it happen.) Leadbeater comments something like, "We talked in some gardens for some time - or rather he talked, and I listened." 😉
One point about that is that I tend to think of Saint Germain as a physical man, not a 'spirit', as such. Meetings such as that one in Rome were physical.
Venetian
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Thanks for that
Well there are no records of him dying, So I very much believe he is out and about very strongly.
It is either St Germain or Archangel Michael I see and meet up with a lot
Though Ste Germain Archangel Michael, St Francis all the same line.
I am very much my back ground,( Astral Magician) Crystals, and representative, from this realm and many others. So astral travel is somethign I do allot as well as developing in
Love
Ithar:)
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
ORIGINAL: Ithar
Well there are no records of him dying,
That's another point of course. There was some story that he had died in the 1700s - but then he was present and in good health (he never was seen ill) at a Masonic gathering after that, and of course many more times. I have friends who say they have met him personally - and I mean physically - but that's another story.
So no death recorded, no body, no funeral. I just wonder what down-the-line materialists make of all that? 😉
Years ago a decent TV docu was made about Saint Germain in the "In Search of..." series related my Leonard Nimoy. This too concluded that he was a famous figure who never aged and is not known to have died.
BTW there was a charlatan in Paris just a few years ago calling himself "Saint Germain" - no relation.
V
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
I have friends who say they have met him personally - and I mean physically
Venetian,
I read the information on the website you posted in your first message and cannot help wondering: what is the purpose of his manifestations? What do you think?
Under what circumstances did St Germain manifested himself to your friends? What changed for them after his visit?
I'm just curious...
Mirrie
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
ORIGINAL: Mirrie
and cannot help wondering: what is the purpose of his manifestations? What do you think?
For the large picture you'd have to ask him! But there are one or two well-researched biographies of him, and just one thing emerging from them is that he repeatedly tried to guide the destiny of Europe by getting to know the royalty and offering his advice. In the long-run they appear to have very seldom heeded him - such as his warning of the coming of the French Revolution, and Marie Antoinette ignoring that.
In a fascinating book by Manley P. Hall, "The Secret Destiny of America" it emerges that a mysterious figure, or figures, not really recorded in traditional history books, were the driving force behind the American Revolution. Such a mysterious figure even gave a resounding speech for liberty which impelled the signers of the Declaration of Independence to rush forward and sign after hours or days of delay and debate. Many who've looked into all this believe that one thing Saint Germain was attempting to do was inaugurate democracy in our world for the first time, and it did not work in Europe so he moved his efforts across the ocean.
Under what circumstances did St Germain manifested himself to your friends? What changed for them after his visit?
<<After a few hours I decided to edit my reply to this. What individuals have told me is 'anecdotal', and personal, and it feels better to keep to the historical and other kinds of facts 'out there' in the world. I prefer the angle that Saint Germain is as real and as historic a figure as anyone else in fairly recent history.>>
V
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Just to ask many days later...
Nothing else anyone cares to add to this? I would have thought it an amazing challenge to science that a man is documented to have lived so long and was such a mystery - i.e. he knew how to do it and is not ever known to have yet passed on.
Maybe it should have been under "psychic" or "spiritual", but I was interested in looking at the known historical record and hard facts more than readings etc 🙂
Venetian
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Hi David,
Maybe the reason why nobody has responded is because very few have heard of St Germain. However, his life story correlates with Rasputin in many ways, and this personage too, is worthy of a great deal of research.
Love,
Patsy.
[:-]
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Hi Patsy,
Er, I would not agree with the comparison TBH. "Saint Germain" means Holy Brother for this is how people found him to be, whereas for want of a better word, Rasputin was "evil". Hard to kill, granted, but in the end finished off OK. I do agree he is a mystery figure of course, but mortal.
I am surprised if few know of Saint Germain - that's illuminating to me. He was one of the most influential people in all of Europe for at least 150 years! Almost every Rohal household knew him and used his services.
I would guess, I think accurately, that historians do not know how to deal with a clearly paranormal figure. So he not so much spoken of.
V xxx
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
"The historical records are unquestionable"
I rather think they are, like most historical records. People only put down what they believe or what they want others to think. Rarely do they write the objective truth even if they are trying to do so. Many records of very well-known events differ hugely. The occultist Alliette stated at the time that there were two Counts. So people were not in agreement even at the time.
It sounds like he certainly existed as an extraordinary character. But any indication of immortality is pure hearsay. No proof of birth date for starters.
The Fortean Time says this: "Although we can’t conclusively determine St-Germain’s age and origin, we do have an answer from the Count himself. He told Prince Karl he was the son of Francis Rakoczy II, Prince of Transylvania, and gave his age as 88. If this were true, he would have been 67 at Versailles, when he was said to look 45, and Francis would have sired him at the tender age of 15. Neither is impossible. However, it’s also possible the Count was deluded – like all those Anastasia candidates – or that Karl jumbled his facts. We just don’t know but it’s the closest we have to an answer."
If he looked 45 then he obviously did age. Some people today who are 60 odd look 40 odd. It's not that amazing.
Your initial question was "proof of immortality?" so in any sense of the word "proof", he answer has to be no.
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Thanks, David. I hope that you feel better soon!
Love,
Patsy.
xxxxxx
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Perhaps he was Enoch Root in disguise?
I think I first came across Le Comte in Umberto Eco's "Foucault's Pendulum".
I understood the real chap was thought to have died in the mid 1780s in Schleswig Holstein.
I agree with Nozza that what we have here is just incomplete records. It never occurred to me anyone would take the claim of immortality seriously.
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Hi Nozzy, Sam,
The records of his life are more complete than for most famous personages of history. While there may be tiny errors in the biographies of, say, Napoleon or Louis XV, etc., Saint Germain is just as equally recorded. There are a couple of thick, extremely detailed biographies of him from painstaking research.
So "incomplete records" sounds like something of a cop-out. It's as if I decided not to believe that Napoleon was involved at Waterloo and put that down to "incomplete records". Not a rational approach, is it. I'd be judged irrational. Scores of people left details accounts of knowing le Comte, and he was an advisor to and a messenger of many royal families, who honoured him.
Here's one decent site, which of course any individual may read or filter from awareness. It's a short, balanced summary (only) of all the known information.
What the site doesn't go into are the later meetings such as in the late 1800s.
IMHO since this is history detailed enough to fill a thick biographical book, which it has, and once more because it doesn't fit reductionist materialism it is "filtered out" by intellectual spinning. Comments suddenly become cruder and explanations a bit sparse.
One thing is, it's not intellectually honest IMHO to agree that 20 datums about dozens of other historical figures are almost all accurate, but then to turn around with a more astonishing character and refuse to look at the datums with equal seriousness. It's pcking and choosing among equally-well historically-recorded facts in order to construct one's own preferred history. 😉
A quote from the link. (The link is only recounting all historical records generally agreed upon.) -
-------------------------------------
Although, on the evidence of reliable witnesses, he must have been at least a hundred years old in 1784, his death in that year cannot have been genuine. The official documents of Freemasonry say that in 1785 the French masons chose him as their representative at the great convention that took place in that year, with Mesmer, Saint-Martin, and Cagliostro present. In the following year Saint-Germain was received by the Empress of Russia. Finally, the Comtesse d'Adhemar reports at great length a conversation she had with him in 1789 in the Church of the Recollets, after the taking of the Bastille.
His face looked no older than it had looked thirty years earlier. He said he had come from China and Japan. "There is nothing so strange out there," he said, "as that which is happening here. But I can do nothing. My hands are tied by someone who is stronger than I. There are times when it is possible to draw back; others at which the decree must be carried out as soon as he has pronounced it."
And he told her in broad outlines all the events, not excepting the death of the queen, that were to take place in the years that followed. "The French will play with titles and honors and ribbons like children. They will regard everything as a plaything, even the equipment of the Garde Nationale. There is today a deficit of some forty millions, which is the nominal cause of the Revolution. Well, under the dictatorship of philanthropists and orators the national debt will reach thousands of millions."
"I have seen Saint-Germain again," wrote Comtesse d'Adhemar in 1821, "each time to my amazement. I saw him when the queen was murdered, on the 18th of Brumaire, on the day following the death of the Duke d'Enghien, in January, 1815, and on the eve of the murder of the Duke de Berry."
Mademoiselle de Genlis asserts that she met the Comte de Saint-Germain in 1821 during the negotiations for the Treaty of Vienna; and the Comte de Chalons, who was ambassador in Venice, said he spoke to him there soon afterwards in the Piazza di San Marco.
---------------------------------
and on.... 😀
Venetian
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Definitely Enoch Root then, or perhaps Stephenson's inspiration for the Root character.
Odd that while the link you gave says he always wore jewels and the pictures painted of him were full of jewels, the one illustration given shows a plainly dressed, unornamented man in a short wig.
Do we have records of the "many pictures"? Their whereabouts now? There are many known paintings of his contemporaries. Slapping a decent likeness on theinternet might turn him up in a day or so , if he still hasn't changed.
A quick google of the words Napoleon Biography gets 563,000 hits
Saint Germain Biography gets 159,000, but it's evident that Saint Germain refers to several places as well as our man.
Count saint Germain biography gets 21,900 hits. Hardly commensurate with Napoleon, but certainly significant.
The difference lies in corroborative detail. We have birth and death dates and places for Napoleon and neither for SG. You could respond that of course there is no death date, since he is not dead. By the same logic, since we have no birth date, he cannot have been born. Which merely shows how empty that assumption is.
Extraordinary claims do require extraordinary proof. Napoleon was extraordinary, but nowhere near so odd as the claims for SG.
A truly immortal person would be permanently in danger. He would be forced to move frequently, before the peasants showed up with the torches and pitchforks. He would be ever at risk of an accident. Would he dare to travel by aircraft?
Where did he go after 1800? Where is he now? How many living descendants does he have by this time? Do they share his longevity? Given that he moved in high social circles, how many crowned heads carry his genes? Is he sitting in some Bavarian Schloss, the fat spider in a web of blood relations, running a mysterious financial cartel?
Or did he perhaps meet his end through some stray bomb or bullet in any of the many wars since?
Or did he quietly snuff it like everybody else?
Actually it ought to be possible to find such a person. Investment records would be useful. In the future, when we are all issued with genetically coded ID chips before birth, the loopholes will close. Which would be a pity, I feel. I like stories like this. I just don't feel any need to believe them.
By the way- you are right about picking and choosing historical data, but historians do it all the time, because they consider one source more reliable than another. (I'm no historian). What does seem odd to me about the records of SG is that contemporaries who claimed to know of his extraordinary longevity nonetheless appear to have engaged him in polite conversation about affairs of the day instead of asking him how he did it.
I mean if you met someone you thought might be immortal , would you be interested in his politics?
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
ORIGINAL: Soapy Sam
He would be forced to move frequently, before the peasants showed up with the torches and pitchforks.
He had stable homes for a couple of years at a time and there were no pichforks. This is sarcasm IMO, Sam. On the other hand he did travel enormously - every state of Europe I can think of, over and over, and was with Clive in India apparently.
You have a few nice 'scientific' ideas here such as stats on Napoleon but I only pulled his name out of my head. Of course he is more famous. We could rather look up records on someone equally famous to SG. The Count didn't really hang around enough or rather seem to aspire to power. He was rather the advisor behind the throne, it seems. So not as well known as heads of state, though he bowed to none it seems.
Frankly you miss the implication. I will be frank, and atheists may laugh as they will. It gets into regious or spiritual belief. If he was seen in 1897 and even later, for which there are records, he's not just a chap who managed to slow down aging. If angels exist, or if Jesus Ascended, do they then age and die? The religious would say not. That's why, in the opinion of many, the Count did not hang around and live a material life such as we do, and it may be why there is no record of his death.
Didn't you notice the bit in the quote where he uttered a great statement, walked out the door, and could not be seen or found right afterwards? I'm not sure if the exercise has been done, but it may be if you put all the dates together of when people met and talked to him, there may be curiosities such as his having been in distant locations just a day later.
I headed the thread, "Proof of Immortality?" That's because clearly a normal, mortal man such as you write about would not be immortal..... But an immortal would have become something else, if not mortal.
BTW on paintings I haven't time but one of the great painters of the day - who was of the day as I'm not up on art? Raphael? - did something most unusual for him. I could look it up later. It's called "The Polish Rider" I think and is a mysterious subject for the artist. It's reputed to be Saint Germain. You won't be interested but there's also a kind of photo of him by the side of HP Blavatsky which again I could get a link for later. That would be maybe 1880. Clearly shows him though you'd say it's a guy dressed up.
Venetian
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Yes, smashing story! Very compelling.
Love,
Patsy.
😀
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
ORIGINAL: venetian
This is sarcasm IMO, Sam.
Nah. Too much Terry Pratchett maybe.
The problem with the whole thing is identification. I'd be fascinated by a photograph of him, or any good portrait you could turn up.
If you met someone who claimed to be SG, you only have two ways to confirm his ID- one is by talking to others who had met him a significant time earlier and asking if they believed him to be the same man. The other is by comparison with an accurate image. (You could question him, but you could never be sure he was not a history student with access to the same data you would need to test him.)
This remains true whether he is human , angel or ET.
Now if Blavatsky met him- and let's face it, she seems to have met everyone else- how did SHE identify him? This is all I would like to establish- either an objective ID by an accurate portrait , or a chain of reliable sightings, ten or twenty years apart , by reliable witnesses. (I would doubt witness testimony after more than 20 years).
I was studiously ignoring the implication you mention, out of politeness. You'll appreciate that in my view, the most likely explanation of the same man being seen at widely separated locations at nearly the same time would be that they were simply not the same man.
Of course, if you are going to imply he was not a man at all, all deductive argument is off, until we can establish what he was and what powers he had;- but then the documentation you hold to be significant becomes rather worthless too, since it is written on the assumption that he is essentially a long-lived human.
If he was an angel,for instance, how do we know there are not several hundred identical versions in existence at any time and that new ones are not manufactured every century or so? What do we know about angels, after all? Do they like jewellery? Are they given to political discussion?
Let's take one level of improbability at a time.
First, establish that there was such a person.(As opposed to several persons claiming to be the same person, at different times.) The ID problem.
Then establish how long he definitely lived. (A minimum figure will do).
Then establish what evidence there is for his immortality.
That would be interesting enough. Proving that he could violate the laws of physics and may have been semi divine seems like a task for a lifetime's work, not for a chat on the internet.
The more dramatic the claims, the harder we must work to prove them.
ETA- I just looked up Rafael- like you I'm no art historian, but I had him pegged for renaissance, which seems about right. He died in 1520, well before the period SG seems to have been prominent- but again we are back to the identification problem- would we recognise him if he did appear in a Rafael work?
As always- somebody got there ahead of me. Several somebodies, in fact.
[link= http://www.metaweb.com/wiki/wiki.phtml?title=Stephenson:Neal:Quicksilver:Enoch_Root ]Neal Stephenson[/link]
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Hi, Sam 😀 -
ORIGINAL: Soapy Sam
Then establish how long he definitely lived. (A minimum figure will do).
I wish I had my old biographies with me, but then it would take time and I can't cut and paste them. However there was a lineage of people who knew each other and knew Saint Germain together which knew him as looking middle-aged by the opening of the 1700s. As the site I quoted says, therefore,
Although, on the evidence of reliable witnesses, he must have been at least a hundred years old in 1784
From the biographies this lineage or whatever one would call it - co-friends - of Saint Germain then continued at least until 1821.
BTW I wasn't implying that he was an angel. Rather that he was a man who discovered how to transcend the state or mortality. The mortal laws no longer applied. You will have noted (?) that he produced prodigeous gemstones at will, and could perform a combination of feats quite peculiar, when combined. He didn't only know everything to quote Voltaire but seemed able to do almost anything.
BTW Manley P Hall and other deeply knowledgeable Masons credited him with the founding of Masonry - in the days when it was a power for good and for enlightenment. Makes you wonder what he did not do.
V
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
What would be intriguing in a case like this is evidence of knowledge that was not obtainable at the time in Europe, but which might be known to someone who had been around long enough to have travelled widely.
If St.Germain had revealed (say) details of the geography of Australia or Antarctica to an audience in 1700, there would be a case to answer. In my (admittedly cursory) reading of various web links, I see nothing like this- much Hermetic mumbling about ancient wisdom, repeated mention of Masonic ritual and other secret arcana, but no actual hard data, no evidence of actual original thinking or genius;- this at a time when really important minds were pushing forward human knowledge faster than at any previous time. Hooke, Newton,Wren, Leibnitz- I find any of these of rather more interest than a probable con man who , for all the claims, appears to have contributed nothing more than any civil servant to human progress.
If he actually had a fortuitous genetic inheritance that gave him superior healing or long life, we would expect to see the genes , by now, relatively common in parts of Europe. If he held some unlikely chemical secret, he seems rather reluctant to share it's benefits with anyone else. (Not that I consider that a bad decision).
But at the end of the day, if someone like this truly existed, I would expect him to leave a more positive and unarguable legacy.
I do rather wonder if what we might have here is simply a father and son- perhaps with twenty years between them- of distinctive and similar aspect, who used their family resemblance to con themselves a position in society.
-A hypothesis plucked from the air, but one which explains much without any need for supernatural / para normal / whatever explanation at all.
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Hi Sam,
I think we've both put the cases pro and contra as much as can be done or at least without my having biogs at hand, as I remember little more detail myself than the net tells.
for all the claims, appears to have contributed nothing more than any civil servant to human progress.
Only warned repeatedly and in detail of the coming French Revolution before there was the slightest sign of it. It's as if he could not physically intrude but had the role of warning those in power - note that he had no position (we know of). He'd have changed history had he been heeded.
The father-son idea is a decent idea, but I sure know it wouldn't work on me if a friend I know well kept re-entering my life every ten years over fifty years. I'd know him for sure ... and start to wonder, "Er, he hasn't changed!"
Well, it's been interesting but I'm giddy with the whirlygig of to-and-fro 😉 - as we've been here before on 2 or three threads, what? Only a couple of months ago I came across the account of a T'ai Chi Master in China who had been very well known by all the local people for about 250 years. Asked how he learned to live so long, he gave a detailed account of how when he was over 100 but still fit, he met a Master 1,000 years old who told him the Tao methods for great longevity. The more recent guy (I'm not even going to get the book in the other room as I don't intend going into this deeply! - ) was in this case known by generations in his town, so he wasn't a series of different people. In the 1920s a Chinese newspaper published an article on him fully acknowledging his age. It was known and not doubted.
Here it was achieved by the use of certain Taoism methods for stimulating Chi which I know is something you love to hear about. 😀 He finally fled to a mountain after the pre-Communist Revolution. If I recall rightly he didn't die but just got lost in that climate. Don't blame him.
Just to be more documentative, I dug out the book. Actually I have half of it xeroxed. The Master was Master Li Ching-Yun, with photo and all. The book is "Qigong Teachings of a Taoist Master" by Stuart Alve Olsen, 2002, Healing Arts Press, Vermont. I may have got the details a bit wrong by not looking them up but probably erred on the side of the more normal.
Here it is now in front of me. Apparently he was one of a number who knew how to achieve great longevity (with real health) in China. He was born in 1678 and people knew him all his life. It was actually the enemy of Communism whose forces lost the civil war and fled to Taiwan who requested an audience with him, Kai-shek. When his envoy went to get the Master, he returned saying he had died at 256. Apparently few believed this and knew he had just gone out of sight.
In China this is apparently documented in exactly the way you would like. People were born and died knowing him. But unless you read Mandarin, that's the end of that for you and I! I doubt one achieves such longevity over a keyboard 😉 so...
Venetian
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
A lengthy quotation here, with some editing on my part, indicated by the <<snip>>. But in case my snips inadvertently change the meaning, the link to the original is posted above. NLI
Hi Sharon, and all,
How does one know what is an accurate source (as in material from the unseen), you ask?
<<snip>>
So I can't come up with an infallible formula for accurate discernment. Maybe it would be a boring world if we didn't all have to test things and decide for ourselves.
<<snip>>
I wonder if you are familiar with the Mahatmas, Morya and Kuthumi (and others), who founded the Theosophical Society through H.P. Blavatsky? Now, when they first founded the T.S.in 1875, they were not even out-of-body but still incarnated as Adepts, usually living in the Himalayas, though they also visited Europe, etc. For speed and convenience, since they could teleport letters, they wrote many scores of famous letters to disciples, the "Mahatma Letters", which are preserved, most in the British Library where they are viewable, and published now. These Letters would just appear, such as floating down to the ground from nowhere.
Morya and Kuthumi wryly commented that before the Letters, their names were not even known to the public whatsoever; but within a handful of years (this is the 1880s) simply scores of mediums, possibly hundreds, were bringing forth "messages from Morya and Kuthumi". They were not authentic. A google search will show that the names are still prolifically claimed by channelers etc. I do accept a very small number of sources since the 1800s, but not 99%.
I think a healthy knowledge of all the possible sources of false messages is what is most needed among the more gullible.
I'll give just one really telling example. In 1976 a group of rather clever parapsychologists from the Canadian Society for Psychical Research wondered, "What would happen if we literally invented a ghost, a ghost we knew never really existed as any living person, and yet we gave him a detailed life-history, characteristics we agreed on, and then had a seance to 'communicate'? They invented Philip the Ghost, a 'deceased pirate'. Sure enough, Philip not only communicated by ouija board, but could levitate and bang the table around (the scientists did have their hands on top, but not beneath). This was a replicable phenomenon, and so was even demonstrated at the time to an amazed audience on live Canadian TV, on a chat show. Videos were once available of this. Philip didn't like his 'slot' on the show ending, so the table followed the host up some stairs, the scientists touching only its top and having to follow!
An English friend of mine replicated this in the 70s with another invented ghost, and tables levitated, the ghost would reply in detail, etc.
I should state right now that I do NOT advise others to try this, and I never did partake. The phenomena occur through the drawing off of ectoplasm or life-force from the bodies of the sitters, which is extremely unhealthy (and yours gets mixed up with others' before returning to you). Really not a great idea. The mixed ectoplasm forms the combined thought-form of the ghost (which has measurable body weight in proportion to the weight lost by all sitters). Again, it's interesting to read of but most unhealthy to get into trying.
But consider this replicable experiment in the light of all mediumship and channeling. If one sitter, or a number of sitters, desire messages, and perhaps if they do not and are not attempting anything of the sort, apparently we have the ability to bring forth detailed communications from Aunt May, Uncle Fred, or Plato, or Jesus, or Ashtar Command from Planet X, etc., , and to become totally hoodwinked by this, becoming fascinated and caught up. The phenomenon continues and one gets used to asking questions of the same or multiple supposedly authentic sources.
The more one continues, the core compex
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Hi Nancy,
I don't see your point at all. The existence of a man called Saint-Germaine is a part of the historical record e.g. the crowned heads of Europe knew him well, as did their associates and famous people such as Voltaire. From scores of physical historical records not associated with each other, people sometimes casually mention meetings with him in their memoirs, etc. Whether he was one man, or two as Sam suggests, and whether genuine or not as a 'Hierophant' (as Emma Calve called him after a meeting in 1897), he is part of the historical record as being genuinely there and a physical man, like say Galileo or Darwin.
He wrote a book we still have and is published, he wrote piano sonatas the scores of which are kept and have been recorded. Some of the most well-known people of the time attest to having known him.
That's a different subject to channelled messages which involve a medium or channeller speaking or writing messages from any named being. On that score I'd agree with Sam that the evidence required is of an entirely different nature. In fact it's hard to know how one could ever prove a channelled "message" from 'Captain Electron From Planet X' 😀 is actually from such a being lest he deemed it wise to come down physically and meet us.
I see no connection between channelling and history, though certainly history can be given different twists of interpretation. We can interpret who Saint Germain was in different ways, but that he existed is historical record.
Did Waterloo happen? I think we agree it did. Is a channelled message from someone in California really from 'Commander Ashtar'? Hmm... 😉
But I was interested through this thread to discover so few people seem to have known (or known much) of the physical man, Saint Germain, whatever his origin and nature. As a frequent messenger between the European royalty and intelligensia, yet as one telling them what to do, and they at least listening, he certainly holds a place in real, physical history.
Venetian
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Probably the best book and biography on Saint Germain is by Jean Overton Fuller who is a painstaking and detailed researcher: "The Comte De Saint Germain". Amazon USA:
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
One possible tool for dividing the improbable from the impossible is to ask what evidence is NOT present.
An example-in the quote from Venetian above, I find this phrase;
"..since they could teleport letters, they wrote many famous letters..."
Now by "letters" do we mean documents, or characters?
In 1875, anyone could teleport "letters" in the second sense of the word. The mechanism was the telegraph. It was perfectly possible to telegraph London from several cities in India. There was no need for teleportation. The message might be telegraphed to England, delivered to a disciple and written down- using the best Indian paper and ink, probably manufactured in Manchester, then thrown through the window of a room, to "materialise" in the midst of an animated party.
I don't say this is how it was done, just that this is how it easily could have been done.
If by "letters" we mean envelopes with writing, the whole thing becomes more interesting- There are questions of control involved which have other applications. To send a physical letter across roughly 20% of a rotating planet, correcting for latitude and altitude, coriolis effect , weather and humidity and have it arrive at a specific addressis a neat trick.
Even neater , in the mind of some, would be to perform the same trick with a letter bomb. Or indeed with spam. Yet, this did not happen that I'm aware of. Not even during the struggle for Indian independence, or during the Indian Mutiny.
Teleporting a piece of paper to appear inside the heart of some deserving individual would be a neat move too. As an instructional technique it would only need to be demonstrated once or twice to guarantee non interference from the bad people of the world. Simply making a piece of paper, prominently labelled "BOMB" appear on many a dictator's desk would suffice to send his troops in another direction entirely.
Yet the Red Guards overran Tibet, with all it's adepts, with no difficulty except those of altitude and terrain.
Why do we suppose this is? Can these methods not be used, even in self defence, yet it's OK to teleport letters full of philosophical chit chat to friends in London?
The picture strikes me as inconsistent.
Another thing that does not happen is for one of the teleported letters to arrive, containing detailed written instructions for the teleportation of letters. Surely, this would be the first thing one would teleport? If only to speed a reply?
Perhaps, on balance it was just the information they teleported? But that too has interesting implications. Why did the Raj spend so much on laying telegraph cable, when India apparently had people who could have done the job for nothing? A strange oversight.
Or maybe they couldn't actually do it at all and the telegraphic explanation is the simplest?
Incidentally, Kipling wrote an account of fraud by wire , entitled "In the House of Suddhoo" in the "Plain Tales from the Hills" stories. It must have been as common a scam in the early days of the telegraph as emails from Nigerian ministers wanting to put £5 million in your account are nowadays.
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
Hi Sam,
The Mahatma Letters is a big subject and would need another thread. They are letters, yes. I've seen them in the British Library. At least several individuals received them, from two Masters. In the British Library they are kept in five volumes. They are also in print - which is useful since the handwriting is full of character and taxing (I found) to read.
The Letters actually were personal so the idea of experimentation of controls wasn't a foremost thought. But such methods were used e.g. appearing inside locked cabinets. But the reason for the many Letters was to convey instruction from teacher to disciple. They have been the subject of much speculation, disbelief, belief, and were full of deep information to the people of the time, if not of today. If you do a search they are available in several places online too!
One thing of note is that the written writing upon various forms of paper on hand at the time in Tibet or elsewhere under microscope can be seen not to be from pen or pencil at all. It is as if the pigment of the paper has been changed. It looks rather like a colour print-out of handwriting from a modern printer, with striations. What coloured the paper has never been solved - there was no pressure applied.
The reason "India" or "Tibet" didn't use this method is because it was not available to India or Tibet. It is a method which can be produced, so the authors explained, by a consciousness which has been trained to do it, but that training is a long spiritual training in spirituality. Call them an off-shoot ability to perform miracles as an off-shoot from a form of inner development. You don't just learn how to teleport letters without changing yourself and who you are, in other words.
All not quite the subject of the thread - but they can be read online. 😉
Venetian
RE: Saint Germain - Proof of Immortality?
ORIGINAL: venetian
The reason "India" or "Tibet" didn't use this method is because it was not available to India or Tibet. It is a method which can be produced, so the authors explained, by a consciousness which has been trained to do it, but that training is a long spiritual training in spirituality. Call them an off-shoot ability to perform miracles as an off-shoot from a form of inner development. You don't just learn how to teleport letters without changing yourself and who you are, in other words.
Venetian
You consider the highlighted comment to be an explanation? "This can be done by people trained to do it."? Seems tautologous to me.
I just read through a couple of the letters online. Oh dear, what tedious twaddle! If the Masters' purpose was to educate, I'd hate to see them trying to confuse. If you could read this in the original hand written form without falling asleep, my hat's off to your determination.
I keep hearing about ancient wisdom, but all I see here is someone writing waffle in the over-ornate style of a Peter Sellers Brahmin, (B.A. Calcutta (failed)).
Le Compte is far more fun. I've been induced to start re-reading Neal Stephenson's "Quicksilver", to have a closer look at Enoch Root. There are certainly echoes of SG in this enigmatic character. (Particularly since he appears in later novels set in World War Two). The "Baroque Cycle" novels are very entertaining. I think you would enjoy them. I dare say you would catch a lot of references I've missed.
My friend met St. Germain, so he does exist and he is immortal.
I believe there are immortal beings. My friend met St. Germain many years ago out in the western part of the USA. Oh more than 20 years ago or so. St. Germain is immortal. I suspect he may be an avatar; but he does very much exist on the physical and on the spiritual plane both. However, he may be much more than a mere mortal in that he has other wordly powers. For example. When my friend saw him in the woods out west St. Germain just appeared to him out of nowhere, spoke to him, told him some things of a personal nature and left again. But, my friend is a very gifted spiritual person with powers of clairvoyance and other such gifts and powers. Since he was a young child he has been able to see and communicate with spirits. But when St. Germain appeared to my friend he was very much alive, living and breathing and was not in spirit form. St. Germain is not just a spirit as I said. He is very much also human but more than a mere human. St. Germain also sits on the Karmic Board. There are other members who also sit on the board. So, he is human and more than human and immortal and more than that.
RE: My friend met St. Germain, so he does exist and he is immortal.
Dear All
I have found reading this thread very informative and really did enjoy the information being shared. St. Germain has an historical figure in fascinating and reminds me of the High Priest Melchizedek mentioned in the bible 'he had no beginning and no end' and his appearances in the bible seem to be almost identical to those spoken about with St. Germain, also similar stories have been talked about in India with Babaji coming and going in the same way. So it is not uncommon for these types of stories to be recorded in fact, if one did a lot of research one could probably find an individual such as this from every culture.
I have also appreciated Sam's reasoning so thank you for offering a different perspective to the forum and discussion.
Oh dear, what tedious twaddle! If the Masters' purpose was to educate, I'd hate to see them trying to confuse. If you could read this in the original hand written form without falling asleep, my hat's off to your determination. I keep hearing about ancient wisdom, but all I see here is someone writing waffle in the over-ornate style of a Peter Sellers Brahmin, (B.A. Calcutta (failed)).
Nearly fell off my chair laughing at this quote above and although I have never ever been interested in reading these letters, Sam you have certainly encouraged my curiosity to take a look can you share a link please?
Back to St Germain, I know this thread is not about the esoteric but it does beg the question about the belief of many that St Germain is also Merlin and how he decides how and which form he will manifest? Also how Theosophy differentiate between the two different energies and why he would manifest as one or the other either in physical or spiritual form?
My heart of sentimentality was touched by the original quote 'to know him is to love him' it reminded me of my husband because he said exactly the same to others about me 'to know her is to love her' beautiful.
Divine Love
RE: My friend met St. Germain, so he does exist and he is immortal.
It seems to me that this thread went offits 'scientific' bent a few posts back.
Patsy.