ON DISAPPEARANCE
ED. NOTE-The aphorism of Patanjali on the subject of this
article is No. 21, Book III, and in the American edition reads
as follows:
By performing concentration in regard to the properties and
essential nature of form, especially that of the human body,
the ascetic acquires the power of causing the disappearance of
his corporeal frame from the sight of others, because thereby
its property of being apprehended by the eye is checked, and
that property of sattva which exhibits itself as luminousness
is disconnected from the spectator's organ of sight.
In the old edition and in that published by M.N. Dvivedi,
the word used for concentration is sanyama. This is to be translated
as concentration, and also "restraint," which comes
to the same thing. The aphorism raises the issues made by modern
science that no disappearance is possible if the object be in
line with a normal eye and there be light and the like. Hypnotism
has for some made the modern view a little doubtful, but many
deny hypnotism, and the cases of disappearance in those experiments
have all been but disappearances for the senses of but one person
who is admittedly under some influence and is not normal in organ
and function. The author cites alleged cases of complete disappearance
of ascetics from the sight of normal persons normally exercising
their senses. It is not a case of hypnotism collectively or otherwise,
but should be distinguished from all such. In hypnotic cases
normal function is abated and the mind imposed with an inhibiting
idea or picture which seems real in action to the subject. In
the cases of the ascetics there is left to those about perfect
control of their organs and senses, the powerful mental action
of the ascetic bringing into play another law as indicated in
the aphorism, which prevents the senses, however normal, from
seeing the form of the ascetic. Form, it is held by the occultists
of the school to which Patanjali must have belonged, is an illusion
itself, which remains for the generality of people because they
are subject to a grand common limitation due to the non-development
of other than usual senses. It would seem that all clairvoyance
might prove this, as in that it is known by the seer that every
form visible to our eye has extensions and variations in the
subtler parts of its constitution which are not visible on the
material plane. The illusionary nature of form in its essence
being meditated on, one becomes able, it is held, to check the
"luminousness of sattva" and thus prevent sight.
This does not mean that ordinary light is obstructed, but something
different. All light, gross or fine, is due to the universal
sattva, which is one of the qualities of the basis of
manifested nature. And besides showing as ordinary light, it
is also present, unseen by us it is true, but absolutely necessary
for any sense-perception of that sort, whether by men, animals,
or insects. If the finer plane of this luminousness is obstructed,
the ordinary light is none the less, but the result will be that
no eye can see the body of that person whose mind is operative
at the time to cause the obstruction of the luminous quality
mentioned. This may seem labored, but it is in consequence of
our language and ideas that such is the case. I have known some
cases in the West of disappearances similar to those mentioned
by the foregoing article, and in Secret Doctrine and,
I think, Isis Unveiled are some references to the matter
where the author says the power conferred by this is wonderful
as well as full of responsibility. While very likely no Theosophist
or scientist will be able to use this power, still the cases
cited and the explanation will go towards showing that the ancient
Rishees knew more of man and his nature than moderns are prone
to allow, and it may also serve to draw the attention of the
mind of young Indians who worship the shrine of modern science
to the works and thoughts of their ancestors.
Path, January, 1894.
Theosophy.org Home
| up | top
|