I have to ask, with respect to the Hierarchy of Masters, how can such a thing exist in oneness? It seems to be an invention of the mind that they be ranked at all.
Is it an invention of the mind that one person can have more IQ points than another? That one person has 20/20 vision and another is
measurably nearsighted? Or that two people do not have equal knowledge and understanding of the new archaeological discovery at Göbekli Tepe, Turkey ... or of archaeology in general? I would say not.
Your point is not lost, however. Those who have misinterpreted the Eastern doctrines as suggesting that
consciousness itself, along with Individuality become
annihilated upon the attainment of Nirvana, have completely misunderstood what the Buddha taught, what was already believed before the Buddha, and also what has come after - either by way of clarification, summary or elucidation. I would suggest that those who have *given up* on such pursuits ... renew the search. Keep questing. You will find that things aren't nearly so cut and dried as the self-designated `experts' and scholars have suggested. Also,
see below ...
Lunitik said:
Mind wishes to compare, to order, but in absolute oneness there cannot be a higher or lower, there cannot be left and right, there cannot be forward and back, there is only this. For me, any Master that presents itself to me, I will say he has not attained to the absolute, he has retained some concept of separation.
We are not speaking of anything
absolute at all! But yes, quite agreed, it is a
seeming paradox that, in oneness, there can be multiplicity. This is an old problem, and one which the Greek philosophers helped us to focus upon ... about the same time of the Buddha. Pythagoras knew well the Teachings of the Great One, owing at least partially to his travels Eastward and *direct experience*.
Let me ask you, for a moment, about your OWN physical body. Is your brain confused, simply because it consists of several
billion cells, certainly each one IMPORTANT to your being CONSCIOUS in the physical world? Or is your body confused because it is composed of TRILLIONS of cells? Why such confusion, then, over a group of just
sixty-three permanent members?
Even several hundred, or several thousand, should be able to operate quite efficiently and effectively ... when there is no
ego involved to muck things up!
No Master has an ego. The fact that you and I do is what proves the obstacle - almost regardless of the situation, including our best efforts to understand the nature of the Great Ones or their motivation.
Nor are any of the Masters likely to
present themselves to you ... so long as ego gets in the way. Perfect enlightenment is not a prerequisite for application to (or the pledge of) discipleship. A dedication to selfless service, including purity of both thought & speech,
is most definitely a basic requirement.
Lunitik said:
From where has this personality arisen? Just because they are on a higher plane does not mean they are above us, or at least our potential. They must still be in some sort of suffering, because they desire distinction and to be treated with a special honor.
The Masters retain no separated personality as such; the illusions we may buy into have never been taught by those with direct access to or experience of the Masters. The Theosophical Society and other esoteric schools of like tradition have always tried to eschew the kind of confusion you echo ... and even H. P. Blavatsky stated that she bitterly resented making the existence of the Masters known to the public, due to the scandal and ridicule it produced, but also - and more importantly - because so few were able to understand or take any of it very seriously.
That the Masters are more experienced, more enlightened than we are ... is something you will need to verify
for yourself. If it were not the case (that they are more advanced and more enlightened) then by definition they would not be
Masters. The idea of self-mastery indicates the point. You and I
are not Masters on the physical, astral and mental planes, much less the subtler planes on which the Masters are normally found. These latter include the Buddhic [or Intuitional, the
4th or `middle' plane of our septenary system], the Nirvanic/Atmic plane, and also the highest two planes of the system which are not accessible by uninitiated human beings at all.
As for special honor, I don't recall mentioning anything about this. If you have come across this somewhere, I would suggest that you have been misinformed. Charlatans on television, asking for money "in the name of Jesus" ... or the same at tent revivals, request `special honor' though deserving of none. The Masters have
never asked for this. Let me illustrate:
I ask pardon for publishing a long excerpt, although this is only half of the
statement found at the beginning of *every one* of the 19 volumes dictated to Alice Bailey by the Tibetan Master. I should clarify that prior to August 1934, this statement was
NOT found within Alice Bailey's books, reinforcing the Tibetan's own statement, and demonstrating clearly that a true Master
does not desire the kind of recognition to which you refer. Again, this is because he HAS NO EGO ... and because the flocks of devotees which invariably gather 'round him only serve to hinder him in the selfless work of World Service. The story of the Buddha and the Christ, and the hindrance that occurred due to their choice to work *on the public stage* should also serve as an example. Their case, however, is different, because these were no ordinary Masters; they were, in short, the two Greatest of the Great Ones that have ever set foot upon our planet ... and the time had come in each of their cases to
demonstrate something on the world stage.
In August, 1934 the Tibetan Master [DK] writes:
"My work is to teach and spread the knowledge of the Ageless Wisdom wherever I can find a response, and I have been doing this for many years. I seek also to help the Master M. and the Master K.H. whenever opportunity offers, for I have been long connected with Them and with Their work. In all the above, I have told you much; yet at the same time I have told you nothing which would lead you to offer me that blind obedience and the foolish devotion which the emotional aspirant offers to the Guru and Master Whom he is as yet unable to contact. Nor will he make that desired contact until he has transmuted emotional devotion into unselfish service to humanity--not to the Master.
The books that I have written are sent out with no claim for their acceptance. They may, or may not, be correct, true and useful. It is for you to ascertain their truth by right practice and by the exercise of the intuition. Neither I nor A.A.B. is the least interested in having them acclaimed as inspired writings, or in having anyone speak of them (with bated breath) as being the work of one of the Masters. If they present truth in such a way that it follows sequentially upon that already offered in the world teachings, if the information given raises the aspiration and the will-to-serve from the plane of the emotions to that of the mind (the plane whereon the Masters can be found) then they will have served their purpose. If the teaching conveyed calls forth a response from the illumined mind of the worker in the world, and brings a flashing forth of his intuition, then let that teaching be accepted. But not otherwise. If the statements meet with eventual corroboration, or are deemed true under the test of the Law of Correspondences, then that is well and good. But should this not be so, let not the student accept what is said."
For further clarification, let me just add that the entire
reason the Tibetan only published his statement in 1934 ... was because, as HE himself points out, Alice had been up working late one night, and in ERROR she forgot to remove the Tibetan's name, or a reference to him, from some of the Teachings. The result was that his identity was released, even though some of his students certainly already knew him ... by several names. He also adds that it is of NO REAL CONSEQUENCE that his identity was given out; after all, if you have read the above statement, and understood it in the least, you will not be much phased ... or swayed to become an unthinking, glamoured devotee.
Lunitik said:
They may exist, they may not, but if they do they are subject also to death, they cannot be forever, that is not the way of things.
Yes, after several hundred years in the body, even the Masters "die." This means that they
put aside the physical body, and instantly they withdraw to the Buddhic or Nirvanic worlds. They do
not have to undergo the purgatory or centuries of `Devachanic reward' and contemplative Bliss-states as we do. They
forsake such conditions - as you and I are not yet able - in order to serve Humanity, precisely because they are on the Bodhisattva Path ... even though not all of the Great Ones will become
a Bodhisattva or World Teacher in the Theosophical or esoteric Buddhist sense. A more general term for them is Nirmanakaya, since they retain not only the Dharmakaya vestiture, but also the Sambhogakayic and the Nirmanakayic, as taught in Buddhist doctrine.
Nor do the Great Ones avoid oneness. Rather, they have sacrificed the Nirvanic Bliss - and *abstracted* state of Being - which is
rightly their reward for
countless lifetimes of selfless service to Humanity and the other Kingdoms of life on planet Earth.
Lunitik said:
They are avoiding oneness, still afraid of it, but then how are they any more a Master than us?
Afraid? The Great Ones? You are projecting, or speaking of some other, clearly non-Initiated type of entity. A Master is well beyond such limitations, although they are the humblest beings you will ever encounter while on this planet.
For clarity, I would direct you to
this brief essay on the Great Ones, written by Annie Besant, former president of the Theosophical Society and also a student of the Masters.
Lunitik said:
They may know more, but that doesn't make them higher, it only means their egos are fueled more. If I met one, I would ask why it persists, why it is trying to change man this way or that, I would say to it that it must move on and let those who remain here do what we can to improve this world. The very choice to do this or that creates its antithesis, you force this on people and eventually they will fight back with that. If the highest on high has not realized this, all conscious beings are in trouble, consciousness itself is doomed.
Egos? Again, you have missed the point.
Indeed, I think there are some realizations in order. Read the piece by Annie Besant, then reconsider your questions. Clearly you have misunderstood the concept of the Mahatmas.
Lunitik said:
There is the concept that all Bodhisatva's are awaiting the last sentient being to pass into enlightenment before they can, it seems very compassionate. I too wish to help as many as I can here, but still it is a method of delaying, of procrastination. As such, it is deeply flawed, they have not realized absolute truth because they are still looking back, trying to carry others there when they have not allowed themselves to dissolve into it themselves - it is almost hypocritical, like they are scared so they want to do it with the masses, not alone, they still need some sort of support.
Procrastination? Delaying what? "
Seems compassionate? ROFL
And you have a better solution?
Forsake the suffering that could be *avoided* if we but cooperated and sought to live more simply? With adequate clothing, food, shelter and love? Lunitik, with all due respect, you make no sense. It seems to me you do not grasp the Bodhisattva ideal whatsoever. It is the conscious choice to remain IN THIS WORLD in order to help its struggling, suffering inhabitants. Yes, you and I - and all aspirants - must do our best to try and rectify apparent duality(ies), illusions, paradoxes and mysteries. But that's part of what life is all about. If it were cake, we'd all be Buddha's by now!
Lunitik said:
It is all very human, very much the way of the mind, but the very goal is of no-mind, to simply reside in the being without desire for anything, simple contentment and happiness. It all looks very strange for me, but if you do not know oneness, it probably looks very appealing, so much knowledge to devour, you can feast forever on it. You needn't ever succumb to the calling, you can postpone infinitely.
This business of dissolution of self (ego) you refer to ... is quite misunderstood. The Western notion is confused, because the
Principles of Consciousness, the very
essence & foundation required for the study and proper understanding of self and Soul ... has never been adequately taught or mastered. If you do not gravitate at all toward the Eastern Wisdom, at least let me suggest a few alternative routes. Else, no wonder you draw such hasty and inaccurate conclusions.
Knowledge alone cannot, and will never lead to full enlightenment. The Buddha warned against this [referring to it as the `Doctrine of the Eye' vs. the `Doctrine of the Heart'], the Great Ones have cautioned us firmly ... and also the Christ! We are all agreed on this I suspect: You, me, Thomas ... and most likely everyone on these forums. I'd hate to see an argument in the other direction.
Lunitik said:
To what end though? Enjoy life, but it is not possible when death is such a fear, you will always be just avoiding death, never really going into aliveness. When you have lived totally, death is welcomed, you only fight it because you have regrets, things you wish you had done. What do these beings wish they had done? Certainly, they still have not let go.
If you fear death, let's talk about it. Let's get it out in the open. There has been so much revealed about the nature
and specifics of life beyond the veil, with studies on the very process of transition out of the body ... that I suspect
all, or very nearly all of your questions can be answered. Again, just
ask ... or start such a thread.
You have a great deal of projection going on. I am not a psychologist or psychotherapist, but I promise to help any way I can. Just
ask!
Namaskar
