[Home] [How to Measure Your Beliefs] [The Man-Made Church] [Misc]

[Home]>[The Man-Made Church]>[45. Every star or planet is inhabited]


This is the 45. Chapter of "The Man-Made Church"


45. Every star or planet is inhabited


by Frank L. Preuss


I once have been asked the following question:

"I've been reading your book on the man-made church. I have quite enjoyed what I have read. There is one thing I would like to bring up to you though. You quote from the letter to the Laodiceans by Jakob Lorber. I personally would love to find all of Paul's writings, and I do suspect that they could have been destroyed intentionally. But I have a very hard time with Jakob Lorber. I link to an article below that is suppose to be his revelation on Saturn for an example. Have you read this?? He seems to have many so-called revelations of the same caliber. He claims Saturn is swarming with people, animals, etc. This may have been believable in the mid 1800's, but seems sort of ridiculous today. What are your thoughts? "

This question and my reply can be found on this webpage: Correspondence with Curtis Lee Hall (3).

In this chapter "45. Every star or planet is inhabited" of the book "The Man-Made Church" I am bringing information that indicates that the belief in the existence of human-like beings on other celestial bodies is worldwide.

Science and, other, religions have indoctrinated us so much that we rather believe what they are trying to teach us than that we believe what spiritual light beings tell us.

Everything what comes under the guise of science is immediately believed and accepted by the general public but what comes from God and his prophets is often discarded at once without any earnest examination.

The key to understand life on other celestial bodies and why we, with our state of consciousness, which belongs to earth, cannot perceive life somewhere else, is this state of consciousness. When we want to see, for example, life on a moon, may be our moon, then we have to change our state of consciousness and change it to that state of consciousness that applies to that particular celestial body.

The key to also understand the basics of physics is consciousness. From quantum mechanics it is well known that everything depends on consciousness. The consciousness of the observer is critical. And as long as scientists do not study consciousness they will not really progress.

We can populate the moon and build cities there, but when we do not change our state of consciousness so that it corresponds to the one that applies to the moon, then we will perceive nothing of life on the moon, exactly the same as when we here on earth perceive nothing of life on this earth when we, here on this earth, sleep.

I am now bringing quotations from the book "The Secret Doctrine, Vol. 2" by H.P. Blavatsky. The full title of the book is "The Secret Doctrine, The synthesis of science, religion, and philosophy" by H. P. Blavatsky, author of "Isis Unveiled." Vol. II. – Anthropogenesis:


"Entered according to Act of Congress in the year 1888, by H. P. Blavatsky, in the Office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington, D.C."

This work I dedicate to all true theosophists. In every country. And of every Race. For they called it forth, and for them it was recorded.


Such is the common belief of those who credit every star or planet with being inhabited.


But it seems quite as hopeless to try to convert the modern Geologists and Ethnologists as it is to make Darwinian Naturalists perceive their mistakes. About the Aryan Root-Race and its origins, Science knows as little as of the men from other planets. With the exception of Flammarion and a few mystics among astronomers, even the habitabieness of other planets is mostly denied. Yet such great adept astronomers were the Scientist of the earliest races of the Aryan stock, that they seem to have known far more about the races of Mars and Venus than the modern Anthropologist knows of those of the early stages of the Earth.


Did the Ancients know of worlds besides their own? What are the data of the Occultists in affirming that every globe is a septenary chain of worlds – of which only one member is visible – and that these are, were, or will be, "man-bearing," just as every visible star or planet is? What do they mean by "a moral and physical influence" of the sidereal worlds on our globes?

Such are the question often put to us, and they have to be considered from every aspect. To the first of the two queries the answer is: - We believe it because the first law in nature is uniformity in diversity, and the second - analogy. "As above, so below." That time is gone by for ever, when, although our pious ancestors believed that our earth was in the centre of the universe, the church and her arrogant servants could insist that we should regard as a blasphemy the supposition that any other planet could be inhabited.


Now what are the proofs thereof? Except inferential evidence and logical reasoning, there are none for the profane. To the Occultists, who believe in the knowledge acquired by countless generations of Seers and Initiates, the data offered in the Secret Books are all-sufficient. The general public needs other proofs, however. There are some Kabalists and even some Eastern Occultists, who, failing to find uniform evidence upon this point in all the mystic works of the nations, hesitate to accept the teaching. Even such "uniform evidence" will be forthcoming presently. Meanwhile, we may approach the subject from its general aspect, and see whether belief in it is so very absurd, as some scientists along with other Nicodemuses would have it. Unconsciously, perhaps, in thinking of a plurality of inhabited "Worlds," we imagine them to be like the globe we inhabit and peopled by beings more or less resembling ourselves. And in so doing we are only following a natural instinct. Indeed, so long as the enquiry is confined to the life-history of this globe we can speculate on this question with some profit, and ask ourselves what were the "Worlds" spoken of in all the ancient scriptures of Humanity, with some hope of at least asking an intelligible question. But how do we know (a) what kind of Beings inhabit the globes in general; and (b) whether those who rule planets superior to our own, do not exercise the same influence on our earth consciously, that we may exercise unconsciously - say on the small planets (planetoids or asteroids) in the long run, by our cutting the Earth to pieces, opening canals, and thereby entirely changing our climates. Of course, like Caesar’s wife, the planetoids cannot be affected by our suspicion. They are too far, etc., etc. Believing in esoteric astronomy, however, we are not so sure of that.

But when, extending our speculations beyond our planetary chain, we try to cross the limits of the solar system, then indeed we act as do presumptuous fools. For – while accepting the old Hermetic axiom: "As above, so below" – we may well believe that as Nature on Earth displays the most careful economy, utilizing every vile and waste thing in her marvellous transformations, and withal never repeating herself – we may justly conclude that there is no other globe in all her infinite systems so closely resembling this earth that the ordinary powers should be able to imagine and reproduce its semblance and containment.*

[* We are taught that the highest Dhyan Chohans, or Planetary Spirits (beyond the cognizance of the law of analogy), are in ignorance of what lies beyond the visible planetary system, since their essence cannot assimilate itself to that of worlds beyond our solar system. When they reach a higher stage of evolution these other universes will be open to them; meanwhile they have complete knowledge of all the worlds within and beneath the limits of our solar system.]

And indeed we find in the romances as in all the so-called scientific fictions and spiritistic revelations from moon, stars, and planets, merely fresh combinations or modifications of the men and things, the passions and forms of life with which we are familiar, when even on the other planets of our system nature and life are entirely different from ours. Swedenborg was pre-eminent in inculcating such erroneous belief.

But even more. The ordinary man has no experience of any state of consciousness other than that to which the physical senses link him. Men dream; they sleep the profound sleep which is too deep for dreams to impress the physical brain; and in these states there must still be consciousness. How, then, while these mysteries remain unexplored, can we hope to speculate with profit on the nature of globes which, in the economy of nature, must needs belong to state of consciousness other and quite different from any which man experiences here?

And this is true to the letter. For even great adepts (those initiated of course), trained seers though they are, can claim thorough acquaintance belonging to our solar system only. They know that almost all the planetary worlds are inhabited, but can have access to – even in spirit – only those of our system; and they are also aware how difficult it is, even for them, to put themselves into full rapport even with states of consciousness possible on this globe; i.e., on the three planes of the chain of spheres beyond our earth. Such knowledge and intercourse are possible to them because they have learned how to penetrate to planes of consciousness which are closed to the perceptions of ordinary men; but were they to communicate their knowledge, the world would be no wiser, because it lacks that experience of other forms of perception which alone could enable them to grasp what was told them.

Still the fact remains that most of the planets, as the stars beyond our system, are inhabited, a fact which has been admitted by the men of science themselves. Laplace and Herschell believed it, though they wisely abstained from imprudent speculation; and the same conclusion has been worked out and supported with an array of scientific considerations by C. Flammarion, the well-known French Astronomer. The arguments he brings forward are strictly scientific, and such as to appeal even to a materialistic mind, which would remain unmoved by such thoughts as those of Sir David Brewster, the famous physicist, who writes: -

"Those ‘barren spirits‘ or ‘base souls,‘ as the poet calls them, who might be led to believe that the Earth is the only inhabited body in the universe, would have no difficulty in conceiving the earth also to have been destitute of inhabitants. What is more, if such minds were acquainted with the deductions of geology, they would admit that it was uninhabited for myriads of years; and here we come to the impossible conclusion that during these myriads of years there was not a single intelligent creature in the vast domains of the Universal King, and that before the protozoic formations there existed neither plant nor animal in all infinity of space"! *

[* Since no single atom in the entire Kosmos is without life and consciousness, how much more then its mighty globes? – though they remain sealed books to us men who can hardly enter into the consciousness of the forms of life nearest us?

We do not know ourselves, then how can we, if we have never been trained to it and initiated, fancy that we can penetrate the consciousness of the smallest of the animals around us?]

Flammarion shows, in addition, that all the conditions of life – even as we know it – are present on some at least of the planets, and points to the fact that these conditions must be much more favourable on them than they are on our Earth.

Thus scientific reasoning, as well as observed facts, concur with the statements of the seer and the innate voice in man’s own heart in declaring that life – intelligent, conscious life - must exist on other worlds than ours.


Flammarion in is work "Sur la Pluralité des Mondes habités," says: - "It seems as if in the eyes of those authors who have written on this subject, the Earth were the type of the Universe, and the Man of Earth, the type of the inhabitants of the heavens. It is, on the contrary, much more probable, that, since the nature of other planets is essentially varied, and the surroundings and conditions of existence essentially different, while the forces which preside over the creation of beings and the substances which enter into their mutual constitution are essentially distinct, it would follow that our mode of existence cannot be regarded as in any way applicable to other globes. Those who have written on this subject have allowed themselves to be dominated by terrestrial ideas, and fell therefore in error." ("Pluralité des Mondes," p. 439.)

But Flammarion himself falls into the very error which he here condemns, for he tacitly takes the conditions of life on earth as the standard by which to determine the degree to which other planets are adapted for habitation by "other Humanities."

Let us, however, leave these profitless and empty speculations, which, though they seem to fill our hearts with a glow of enthusiasm and to enlarge our mental and spiritual grasp, do but in reality cause a factitious stimulation, and blind us more and more to our ignorance not only of the world we inhabit, but even of the infinitude contained within ourselves.

When, therefore, we find in the Bibles of Humanity "other worlds" spoken of, we may safely conclude that they not only refer to other states of our planetary chain and Earth, but also to other inhabited globes – stars and planets; withal, that the latter were never speculated upon. The whole of antiquity believed in the Universality of life. But no really initiated seer of any civilized nation has ever taught that life on other stars could be judged by the standard of terrestrial life. That which is generally meant by "earths" and worlds, relates (a) to the "rebirths" of our globe after each manvantara and a long period of "obscuration"; and (b) to the periodical and entire changes of the Earth's surface, when Continents disappear, to make room for Oceans, and Oceans and Seas are violently displaced and sent rolling to the poles, to cede their emplacements to new Continents.

We may begin with the Bible – the youngest of the World-Scriptures. In Ecclesiastes, chap. i., we read these words of the King-Initiate: - "One generation passeth away und another generation cometh, but the earth abideth for ever," and again, "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done, is that which shall be done, and there is no new thing under the sun." Under these words it is not easy to see the reference to the successive cataclysms by which the Races of mankind are swept away, or, going further back, to the various transitions of the globe during the process of its formation. But if we shall refer the reader to the New Testament, where St. Paul speaks (in Hebrews i.) of the Son (the manifest Power) whom (God) hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds (plural.) *

[* This relates to the Logos of every Cosmogony. The unknown Light – with which he is said to be co-eternal and coeval – is reflected in the "First-Born," the Protogonos; and the Demiurgos or the Universal Mind directs his Divine Thoughts into the Chaos that under the fashioning of minor gods will be divided into the seven oceans - Sopta samudras. It is Purusha, Ahuru Mazda, Osiris, etc., and finally the gnostic Christos, who is in the Kabala, Hokkmah or Wisdom the "Word."]

This "Power" is Hokmah or (Chochmah) the Wisdom and the Word. We shall probably be told that by this term "worlds," the stars, heavenly bodies, etc., were meant. But apart from the fact that "stars" were not known as "words" to the ignorant editors of the Epistles, if even they must have been known to Paul, who was an Initiate ("a Master-Builder"), we can quote on this point an eminent theologian, Cardinal Wiseman. In Vol. I, p. 309, of this work treating of the indefinite period of the six days – or shall we say "too definite" – period of the six days of creation and the 6,000 years, he confesses that we are in total darkness upon the meaning of that statement of St. Paul, unless we are permitted to suppose that allusion is made in it, i.e., the period which elapsed between the first and second verses of chapter i. of Genesis – to those primitive revolutions, i.e., the destructions and the re-productions (of the word) indicated in chapter i. of Ecclesiastes; or, to accept, with so many others, and in its literal sense, the passage (Hebrews i. 1,) that speaks of the creation of worlds - in plural. . . . . It is very singular, he adds, that all the cosmogonies should agree to suggest the same idea, and preserve the tradition of the first series of revolutions, owing to which the world was destroyed and again renewed.

Had the Cardinal studied the Zohar his doubts would have changed to certitude. Thus saith Ida Suta (in the "Zohar," iii., 292, c.): "There were old worlds which perished as soon as they came into existence; worlds with and without form called Scintillas - for they were like the sparks under the smith’s hammer, flying in all directions. Some were the primordial worlds which could not continue long, because the ‘aged’ – his name be sanctified – had not as yet assumed his form,*

[* The form of Tikkun or the Protogonos, the "first-born," i.e., the universal form and idea, had not yet been mirrored in Chaos.]

the workman was not yet the ‘heavenly man.’ " +

[+ The "Heavenly man" is Adam Kadmon – the synthesis of the Sephirith, as "Manu Swayambhuva" is the synthesis of the Prajapatis.]

Again in the Midrash, written long before the Kabala of Simeon Ben Iochai, Rabbi Abahu explains: - "The Holy One, blessed be his name, has successively formed and destroyed sundry worlds before this one++

[++ Bereshith Rabba, Parsha IX.]

. . . Now this refers both to the first races (the "Kings of Edom") and to to the worlds destroyed." §

[§ This refers to the three Rounds that preceded our fourth Round.]

"Destroyed" means here what we call "obscurations." This becomes evident when one reads further on the explanation given: - "Still when it is said that they (the worlds) perished, it is only meant thereby that the (their humanities) lacked the true form, till the human (our) form came into being, in which all things are comprised and which contains all forms. . . .*

[* This sentence contains a dual sense and a profound mystery in the occult sciences the secret of which if, and when, known – confers tremendous powers on the Adept to change his visible form.]

- it does not mean death, but only denotes a sinking down from their status . . ." (that of worlds in activity). +

[+ Idra suta, Zohar, iii. 136, c. "A sinking down from their status" – is plain; from active worlds they have fallen into a temporary obscuration – they rest, and hence are entirely changed.]

When, therefore, we read of the destruction of the worlds, this word has many meanings, which are very clear in several of the Commentaries on the Zohar and Kabalistic treatises. As said elsewhere, it means not only the destruction of many worlds which have ended their life-career, but also that of the several continents which have disappeared, as also their decline and geographical change of place.


Therefore, leaving the mystic parables of the Zohar, we will return to the hard facts of materialistic science; first, however, citing a few from the long list of great thinkers who have believed in the plurality of inhabited worlds in general, and in worlds that preceded our own. These are, the great mathematicians Leibnitz and Bernouilli, Isaac Newton himself, as can be read in his "Optics"; Buffon, the naturalist; Condillac, the sceptic; Baily, Lavater, Bernardin de St. Pierre, and, as a contrast to the two last named – suspect at least of mysticism – Diderot and most of the writers of the Encyclopaedia. Following these come Kant, the founder of modern philosophy; the poet philosopher Goethe, Krause, Schelling; and many astronomers, from Bode, Fergusson and Herschell to Lalande and Laplace, with their many disciples in more recent years.

A brilliant list of honoured names indeed; but the facts of physical astronomy speak even more strongly in favour of the presence of life, even organised life, on other planets.


It is better to rest content with the three conclusions which M. C. Flammarion, whom we have so largely quoted, formulates as rigorous and exact deductions from known facts and laws of science.

I. The various forces which were active in the beginning of evolution gave birth to a great variety of beings on the several worlds; both in the organic and inorganic kingdoms.

II. The animated beings were constituted from the first according to forms and organisms in correlation with the physiological state of each inhabited globe.

III. The humanities of other worlds differ from us, as much in their inner organization as in their external physical type.


That which now remains to be demonstrated is, that if it is once proven that there are inhabited worlds besides our own with humanities entirely different from each other as from our own – as maintained in the occult Sciences – then the evolution of the preceding races is half proved. For where is that physicist or geologist who is prepared to maintain that the Earth has not changed scores of times, in the millions of years which have elapsed in the course of its existence; and changing its "skin," as it is called in Occultism, that the Earth has not had each time her special humanities adapted to such atmospheric and climatic conditions as were entailed. And if so, why should not our preceding four and entirely different mankinds have existed and thrived before our Adamic (Fifth Root) Race?


With this we have come to an end with our quotations from the book "The Secret Doctrine" by H.P. Blavatsky.

This was therefore Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, 1831-1891, founder of the Theosophist Society, 1875.

I repeat one sentence of Blavatsky:

"How, then, while these mysteries remain unexplored, can we hope to speculate with profit on the nature of globes which, in the economy of nature, must needs belong to state of consciousness other and quite different from any which man experiences here?"

The understanding of other worlds than our own, the planet earth, will only then be successful when we accept that other states of consciousness are necessary to really get to know them.

Now what should a genuine scientist do to learn something about consciousness?

He should start to study himself.

He should learn lucid dreaming, for example, or to have out of body experiences, or both.

How does he start?

He should become aware of what hypnagogic dreaming is, the state between being awake and sleeping.

He should observe what he perceives when in the hypnagogic state. He should write it down and do it thoroughly, this recording of observed data and pay especially attention to things that are not as they are in normal life, when awake.

It is really true that the figures he sees there are changing all the time? Is it true that these figures, when they come towards the observer, do not stop approaching when they have reached the observer, and go right through him?

He should learn to change states of consciousness. Learning to fall asleep is not necessary; he can do that already; also waking up. But he can learn, while in the hypnagogic state, and while still partly conscious, to change from that state back to the awake state, and do that by keeping the eyes closed and then observing what he sees when he is now back in the normal awake state.

And then he also writes down what he sees when he observes what he sees – in the normal state - looking against his closes eyelids.

Now here we have a nice exercise that allows us to get to know the difference between seeing with our physical eyes and seeing with our spiritual eyes. When we are in the hypnagogic state then we see with our spiritual eyes, not with our physical eyes. Seeing with our spiritual eyes means using our inner senses. Seeing with our physical eyes means perceiving with our outer senses. So the more I practise observing what is going on during the hypnagogic state, the more I practise the use of my inner senses.

So he starts with studying different states of consciousness and then changing from one into another.

And then he might learn how to change, consciously, from the normal state into the hypnagogic state.

And then he carries on into fields that interest him.

Studying the inside of man is the only way to go. Carrying on with the toys of grown-up men like, rockets and space crafts is a waste of energy and tax money.

Real space travel is travelling with one’s mind and not with the speed of a rocket and not with a maximum speed of light, with speed limits, but the speed of information between entangled particles, with the speed of thought-transference – instant travelling – the speed of telepathy.

Human beings have done that in all ages and many records about such travels are available. All the information cited above comes from people who did it. They knew what they are talking and writing about because they have been there themselves.

In conclusion now still some remarks to H. P. Blavatsky.

It was said that she was the founder of the Theosophist Society and that means of an organization and an organization is always a sign that the spiritual side of life is not really understood. We have again and gain dealt with this on this website.

But on this website we also have the book "How to Measure Your Beliefs" and the author is automatically, when he reads something, measuring the faith of a writer and so he also measured the belief of H. P. Blavatsky and it shows that something that was quoted above, "This sentence contains a dual sense and a profound mystery in the occult sciences the secret of which if, and when, known – confers tremendous powers on the Adept to change his visible form," must not just be theory. But these tremendous powers are only then available when they are not just known but also practised in life and that is to a great extent the control of words.

Here a statement, a negative statement, of hers coming from a book about H. P. Blavatsky:

"My present illness as pronounced by my medical attendants mortal; I am not promised even one certain year of life."

And now still a nice sentence coming from Blavatsky's writings:

Theosophists see in the priest of any religion a useless if not pernicious being.


This is the end of "Every star or planet is inhabited"

Go to the German version of this chapter: Jeder Stern oder Planet ist bewohnt

Next chapter: [46]


[Home]>[The Man-Made Church]>[45. Every star or planet is inhabited]

[Home] [How to Measure Your Beliefs] [The Man-Made Church] [Misc]

The address of this page is: