Esoterism and esoterica

[Bruce Michael]

Shalom Br.Thomas,

>If I am to agree with, aaccept, or allow the Secret Doctrine of the >Theosophical Society, then I have to agree that the Christian Scriptures >are fabrications of a truth we no longer possess, the >product of a >conspiracy by corrupt church bureaucrats to overthrow truth and enslave >the large >part of humanity. That is their claim, and their accusation.

Some (most) theosophists deny the Incarnation. They see the teachings as more important than the Deed. They believe Jesus of Nazareth was Jeschu Ben Pandira ( of the Talmud who lived 100 BC). This has been argued for hundreds of years BTW, right back to early beginnings.

Some believe He was a World Teacher, an Ascended Master, or simple man of Nazareth. Teachers like Alice Bailley, Charles Leadbeater, Benjamin Creme believe He was/is the Maitreya Bohisattva (which is interesting if you're a follower of Valentin Tomberg).

God Bless,
Br.Bruce

RAZOR sharp accuracies, definitively speaking, are as the will-o'-the-wisp, save for fundamental mathematical notations. However, one may hold a sense for accuracy; one which, alike to a focus, narrows in on any given specific and pinpoints it, as such.

It is a complex question: that of defining a true and exact accuracy. Accurate thinking when applied, is both satisfying and stimulating. For the closer one is to a specific, the closer the comprehension, the formula, and the actual sense of the reality and of the pneu one may come to.

-The Brothers

 

[InLove]

Shalom, Bro. Bruce--

All occultists on a higher level will agree as to what is true.

I think it is the "higher level" thing that bothers me. Who's to say what is "higher"? I may be misreading the situation, but it seems like there is so much contention between teachers, as if spiritual understanding can only be earned by the most practiced or the most intelligent, and I have even heard it suggested that certain knowledge may only be handed down through bloodlines. It seems to me that this leaves no room for the true mystic who operates on intuition.

Anthroposophy and Theosophy are not meant to be dogmatic religions. Anthroposophy is really just meant to be a method rather than a series of dogmas.

Again, I may be misunderstanding. I ask with my heart that if my next statement offends anyone here, that you forgive me because surely it must arise out of my own misconceptions? At least, I hope so. But it seems to me that the views expressed by many Theosophists (perhaps not so much with Anthroposophy--I'm not sure) is indeed dogmatically opposed to individual interpretations within other Traditions, particularly Christianity, despite the frequent disclaimers to this end. Am I just perceiving something that is not there in reality? If so, can someone help me with this?

Freedom of thought must be respected.

Indeed. For all of us, I would say.

The Esoteric Board, in my opinion, should not be the sole property of the Theosophists.

Did anyone say that it was?

Perhaps I was out-of-line with this observation. The moderation here has been excellent, in my opinion, throughout the time that I have been a member, and I really have no complaints, especially since I have not posted much on the Esoteric board until recently. I think I may just have an individual way of seeing things that doesn't make an easy connection with more widely accepted ideologies. The connection is there, but oftentimes difficult to bring to light. By this, I don't mean that I want so much to teach what I know, but to understand what others are trying to say. It just may be that I am lacking in how I articulate my thoughts.

I will be out of town for the weekend, but I look forward to returning to the conversation. I thought I would not post anymore on this thread because I felt things were getting way too personal. But I want very much to try and understand one more time. I hate giving up.

InPeace,
InLove

 

[Nick the Pilot]

~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~

InLove, You asked,

"Again, I may be misunderstanding. I ask with my heart that if my next statement offends anyone here, that you forgive me because surely it must arise out of my own misconceptions? At least, I hope so. But it seems to me that the views expressed by many Theosophists (perhaps not so much with Anthroposophy--I'm not sure) is indeed dogmatically opposed to individual interpretations within other Traditions, particularly Christianity, despite the frequent disclaimers to this end."​

--> By the way, I do not find your question offensive. (Thanks for asking if it is.) I think it is a great question, in that it opens up communication between different groups.

Regarding dogma within Theosophy, it is true that some Theosophical teachings are opposed to individual interpretations within other Traditions, particularly Christianity. The only difference is that the teachings are not dogmatic. Let me explain what I mean by dogmatic. No particular teaching is required to be believed by any member. You may be surprised to hear it, but Theosophists do squabble about the meanings of the teachings. Theosophists are required to allow another person to have differences in religious ideas. I may think your ideas are goofy, and I may say so, but I respect your right to have those ideas. This may seem like hair-splitting, but it is not. It is a significant difference.

"I think it is the "higher level" thing that bothers me. Who's to say what is "higher"?​

--> Theosophy eaches that there are higher levels of consciousness than this physical plane, and there are humans and former humans who are conscious on these planes. (I have been reading some excellent descriptions another theosophist has been sharing of the higher planes. I think what Bruce means is, when people become conscious on these higher planes, they all observe the same phenomina there, whether thay are Christian, Jain, etc. (Christianity does not recognize multiple levels of higher consciousness, right?)

"But I want very much to try and understand one more time. I hate giving up."​

--> Be like me. Discuss concepts. Ignore personal attacks.

 

[Nick the Pilot]

~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~

Bruce, You said,

"Some (most) theosophists deny the Incarnation."​

--> I would like to agree with you, and corraborate your description of one Theosophical interpretation in vogue nowadays (although it is not an interpretation shared by all Theosophists.) The story of Jesus is seen as a blending of several stories of that time, just as you say. The idea, then, is that Jesus "of Nazareth" may not have actually existed.

Theosophists, of course, are not required to believe in the non-existence of Jesus of Nazareth. (There are Christian Theosophists, as well as other Theosophists, who believe Jesus of Nazareth existed. For example, I would say Andrew believes.) But for Theosophists with similar ideas to mine, the non-existence of Jesus of Nazareth is a real possibility.

 

[taijasi]

I think we're really getting somewhere now in this discussion, at least imho, with your focusing on "higher levels of consciousness," Deb. I'd like to share what this means to me, and explain why it isn't elitist, as has been suggested.

I have Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary handy, to help us get a dictionary definition of `esoteric':

esoteric, adj. 1. understood by or meant for only the select few who have special knowledge or interest; recondite: poetry full of esoteric allusions. 2. belonging to the select few. 3. private; secret; confidential. 4. (of a philosophical doctrine or the like) intended to be revealed only to the initiates of a group: the esoteric doctrines of Pythagoras. [< Gk esôterik(όs) inner, equiv. to esόter(os) inner + -ikos -IC]​

What I've highlighted in blue, and especially the bolded part, is what I'd like to come back to ... but I would also like to share a small portion of the Wikipedia entry for `esotericism,' as this touches on what you've said about mysticism, InLove:

Esotericism largely overlaps with "hidden knowledge." Some overlap exists as well between esotericism and mysticism. However, many mystical traditions do not attempt to introduce additional spiritual knowledge, but rather seek to focus the believer's attention or prayers more strongly upon the object of devotion. A mystic is thus not necessarily an esotericist.​

"Esotericism" sometimes suggests an additional element of initiation, for example the requirement that one be tested before learning the higher truth. Note however that most "esoteric" teachings are widely available, and indeed often actively promoted. [And have I not said this, all along?]​

Another possibility is that such knowledge may be kept secret not by the intention of its protectors, but by its very nature—for example, if it is accessible only to those with the proper intellectual background. ["Cast ye not your pearls before swine ..."]​

In basic terms, what we can say after consulting Webster, and also taking a look at the quoted Wikipedia entry, is that esotericism overlaps with mysticism ... but suggests a further progression. Still, just because a person expresses interest in esoteric teachings, does not make that person an Initiate. {And this begs the $64 million question!}

But the portions of Webster's definition which I emphasized in blue, really do help to clarify where much of the confusion may exist, because something accepted by most Theosophists, and by students of the Wisdom in the 20th and 21st Centuries, is that indeed, there is an objective Path of Initiation. And this is something that we all must tread, regardless of our spiritual (or religious) background, and no matter what our outward spiritual observances (or none).

What this means, in terms of `higher' states of awareness, is that such states are perfectly objective. Arguably, and this is something I enjoy discussing, such states are much more objective than our sensory perceptions, not to mention our intellectual assumptions and conclusions, since both of these - as we all know - are subject to question, interpretation, argument, and error ... not to mention what our current mood is, or what particular emotions we are experiencing.

And just consider: While mystical experiences occur for people around the world, no matter the faith or religious background (every tradition has a mystical component, or even several), notice how subjective these kind of experiences tend to be, as witnessed by a Christian contemplative, vs. a Buddhist, or Sufi. I think this raises an excellent point, Deb.

What would the spiritual path be like, if there were not Those Who have GONE BEFORE us? To whom would we turn, and where would we find the answers that we seek? What would we do about spiritual guidance, if there were no such thing as enlightened, knowledgable, capable and qualified spiritual Teachers?

Am I begging the question? Perhaps. But you think about it. And the challenge that I make, is simple. If you haven't met, or spoken with, or otherwise experienced the plain & simple REALITY of such Teachers (either plural or singular), then the best you can really do, is to keep silent, and hear what others have to share. This, it seems to me, is the most prudent thing to do ... though of course, we are all free to offer our opinions, and to share what we THINK is the most likely "state of reality," despite our NOT having actually experienced it.

So, for example, if I am starting a new job in construction, and I have been assigned to assist with some of the "grunt work," then I am fairly well OBLIGED to take this approach, relative to the construction foreman, as well as the ARCHITECT who designed the structure going up on my job site.

It's not that I'm not free to ask questions, but if I am hired for a particular job, which doesn't involve a great deal of executive decision-making (at the outset), then it's really not my business to poke my nose into the blueprints, and pull on the architect's coattails to tell him he should have added a vaulted ceiling, or used cherry wood instead of pine. These are, perhaps, my opinion, but as I am not the architect, and have only been hired on as a lackey, my work is elsewhere.

Now on my jobsite, as I prove my worth, what will happen (or at least I hope), is that my supervisor will notice my commitment to the task at hand, he or she will notice when I go the extra mile, and in time, if I am careful, I can "prove myself" (testing, trials - what was our definition again?) ... and demonstrate that I am WORTHY (in the truest sense of the word) for promotion.

And has this promotion come because I have done favors for my supervisor, or is it not because I have proven myself? In the ideal world (which is surely God's), this is how things work - or so says the esoterict, because we cannot believe in a God of favoritism, operating according to the motto, "You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours." That is something we must reject, for reasons that I hope should be obvious.

Of course, in time, to take the metaphor further, I will demonstrate that I can perform many tasks at the construction site. I may become a good carpenter, a good painter, a good mason, and even a job foreman eventually, as I show that I can keep track of the big(ger) picture. One day (and with the proper training!), I may even become a junior architect myself! And all of this ... is what a Master does.

Egypt preserved the Teaching regarding such advanced beings in our evolution by speaking of the Master Builder, and a careful screening of Cecil B. DeMille's Ten Commandments will show, clearly enough, that the Wisdom was there, that it has been preserved. Not every Pharaoh in the later dynasties was as well versed in the Mystery Teachings as early on, nor were they all equally enlightened (or spiritually advanced). But is this any different than our leaders today?

At any rate, these teachings are present, within Christianity, within Judaism, within Islam, as they are within Hindusim, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism & Mazdeanism, and as they existed in every ancient religious and philosophical system. The example in Webster, notice, is not even a contemporary, or ancient religion, it is the Mystery School of PYTHAGORAS. And students of the Ageless Wisdom know ... that Pythagoras was not simply "that great mathematician who gave us certain theorems and formulae," as we are often taught in modern schools. Rather, Pythagoras was the head of a full-fledged Mystery School, and this school, like all legitimate schools, had its various orders, or grades of students, who were Initiated into the Mysteries, stage by stage.

One can research, quite easily, the objectivity of what I am saying, and soon it will become apparent, that there is no conspiracy being waged by students of the Ageless Wisdom, unless one somehow feels so self-assured and self-righteous as to make oneself the STANDARD against whom & which all others should be judged - and claim the Golden Key of Truth as, "MY decree!"

In contrast, the goal of the student of the Ageless Wisdom is first to discover, then to enshrine TRUTH, as best as he or she is able, within one's daily life, in all dealings with one's fellow man, and to learn to treat others precisely as indicated by the Golden Rule ... while also seeking to serve that Purpose - for which one believes all Life on Earth has been created.

This is, as some have pointed out, something beyond every single one of us. NONE of us here, knows that ultimate Purpose. We are all, in that sense, students, and seekers. And to the extent that we have dedicated our lives toward serving that Purpose - even as we imperfectly understand, enshrine and embody it - just to such an extent, we might say that we are "on the Path."

~+~+~+~

I think the topic of Initiation, and the various stages of Initiation - as presented by various religions, or even in terms of the Eastern tradition and presentation, compared & contrasted with the Western teachings - might make a wonderful parallel thread to this one. But my posts get lengthy, and I want to wrap this one up.

Initiation, however, will take us straight to the heart of this question of what it means to experience "higher" states, or levels of consciousness, than what we are ordinarily used to. What I really cannot believe, however, is the notion that our individual experiences are "all just subjective" ... so subjective, in fact, that what's good for the goose is not good for the gander.

We may be opening up the discussion to the idea of spiritual states of consciousness, beyond the physical ... but this DOES NOT automatically mean that we cannot measure such states, or that there is no subjectivity. Today, science does allow us to measure the activity of the brain, both quantitatively, and qualitatively, in so, so many ways.

The boundaries are always being pushed, and new areas explored ... such that non-physical gauges of awareness, which truly indicate our spiritual consciousness (again, qualitatively as well as quantitatively) - may be closer than we think. Frankly, given the trouble we seem to be having here, I wish that day would come really soon ... but I shudder, I cringe to think of some of the horrible applications where this would also likely end up, if we weren't prepared.

The Buddha was said to be able to have ... *snap* - Instant Insight - into ANY past life, of ANYone with whom He came into contact. He could tell them what their current life's situation was, in terms of karmic debts and opportunites for spiritual advancement, as well as provide indication of when, where, and under what circumstances many such individuals would attain to Enlightenment.

We may not, as yet, have anything LIKE this degree of enlightenment, as had Shakyamuni Buddha. But one thing I have come to believe about the spiritual worlds, through direct observation, experience and insight ... is that consciousness operates much the same (according to similar prinicples) as it does - even in the brain, in terms of ordinary physical consciousness.

Some of us have a better memory than others, and sometimes our brain just doesn't seem to be working, so to speak ... while other times (like after I drink a cuppa joe), all the synapses can make the right connections, and all the right neurons seem to fire properly.

Perhaps 99 out of 100 people you randomly stop and question ... will all be using VERY little of the brain's true potential, as science has been telling us for decades. That 100th odd person, might just be a genius, and then the whole darn brain is "lit up," when you hook up all the fancy meters and gauges.

Do such meters and gauges - objective methods of "measuring" spiritual enlightenment - even exist?

I haven't the slightest shadow of a doubt that they do. It is a partial "tapping into" `The Network' which is responsible for our common, everyday expressions like, "Hey, she sure is BRIGHT!," or "Wow, so & so has a real GIFT for inspiring a whole roomful of people!"

If that's not objective "measuring," or observation, of the SPIRITUAL worlds (with our human intellects serving as the least channel, or vehicle, for some of that greater Inspiration - both to and through us) ... I don't know what is!

And again, just because my own "gauges" or Spirit-O-Meter may not function as well as the Buddha's, or the Christ's (how'd He pick those 12, and 70, and 500?), doesn't mean that no meter exists, or that it's completely, 100% dormant.

This, then, is part & parcel of the teaching that we are all on the way, ALL in the process of awakening, as God intends it. One of the abilities that is developing .... is our sensitivity to all varieties of Impression, from within (or beyond us, spiritually), as well as from without (from others, of all stages on the spiritual path, including our NON-human co-inhabitants of Planet Earth, called ANGELS or Devas, etc.).

Deb, others, I've given this my darnedest ... so I hope it somehow helps.

Love and Light,

~Andrew

 

[InLove]

Hi All--Peace--

Just a quick comment, since I had promised to get back to this thread this morning. I appreciate the responses to my questions, and I just want you to know that I am not ignoring them. My poor little dogs have some issues that are apparently causing them a bit of misery, and I can't be very happy until I know I've done what I can to help them out. I don't know what they got into, but maybe a green tea and oatmeal bath is in order (for them, lol, not me, although I must say it does sound pretty good....)

So, Nick and Andrew--I haven't forgotten. I just really want to respond with thoughtfulness, and right now I am too distracted. But my intention is to post those thoughts sometime today.

Deb, others, I've given this my darnedest ... so I hope it somehow helps.

Love and Light,

~Andrew

Yes, I can tell, Andrew! And thank you for this.

InPeace,
InLove

 

[InLove]

Okay, doggies are better now. Again, my apologies for the delay.

By the way, I do not find your question offensive. (Thanks for asking if it is.) I think it is a great question, in that it opens up communication between different groups.

Thanks, Nick. You were actually on my mind when I asked. I do realize that my questions may sound as if I am proposing some kind of gauntlet-type challenge. That is really not my intent, and I am so glad that you recognize this.

Regarding dogma within Theosophy, it is true that some Theosophical teachings are opposed to individual interpretations within other Traditions, particularly Christianity. The only difference is that the teachings are not dogmatic. Let me explain what I mean by dogmatic. No particular teaching is required to be believed by any member.

Okay. Please bear with me, though, as I know that getting through to me on this may require some patience. But why is Theosophy particularly opposed to individual interpretations within the Christian Tradition? If no particular teaching is required to be believed by any individual Theosophist, why does Theosophy require the individual Christian to hold to certain teachings? I know that some Christian schools do, but why would Theosophy?

You may be surprised to hear it, but Theosophists do squabble about the meanings of the teachings. Theosophists are required to allow another person to have differences in religious ideas. I may think your ideas are goofy, and I may say so, but I respect your right to have those ideas. This may seem like hair-splitting, but it is not. It is a significant difference.

Actually, I am never surprised by arguments within any religious or philosophical organization. I mean, debate appears to be largely what philosophy is all about anyway. And religion, in my opinion, is so closely related to philosophy that I am not sure I can really tell the difference much of the time. And I really don’t mind the splitting of hairs as long as I can see a purpose behind it. There are cases when I think it is counterproductive, but not always.

Theosophy eaches that there are higher levels of consciousness than this physical plane, and there are humans and former humans who are conscious on these planes. (I have been reading some excellent descriptions another theosophist has been sharing of the higher planes. I think what Bruce means is, when people become conscious on these higher planes, they all observe the same phenomina there, whether thay are Christian, Jain, etc. (Christianity does not recognize multiple levels of higher consciousness, right?)

I honestly think it depends on (here I go again) which Christian you ask, but then I may not exactly understand what you mean by “multiple levels of higher consciousness”. Are you referring to this as it relates to the concept(s) of reincarnation? I’ll wait for your response before I continue, as my answer here would depend on it to a certain extent.

Be like me. Discuss concepts. Ignore personal attacks.

LOL. Well, there is much about you that I can admire. I do try to do this (I haven’t always been real good at it), but I find no reason to get angry anymore just because someone does not agree with me and throws the proverbial stones my way. However, I tend to be more empathetic than is perhaps good for me at times, and this can lead to worry over someone else’s psyche. Who knows? Maybe this is part of my own calling. It is rather difficult to relate to a fellow being’s situation without worrying, especially if he or she seems worried. Don’t know if that makes any sense the way I have stated it.

InPeace,
InLove

P.S. Andrew, I’ll post a response for you in a little while. I am posting between obligations here at home, and I find that each time I accomplish something on my list, I have to rest a bit. But at least I’m actually getting some things done. Checking these off my list is encouraging, and when I can immerse myself in the mundane, I find that I manage to live in the moment and touch the extraordinary.

 

[Ciel]

and when I can immerse myself in the mundane, I find that I manage to live in the moment and touch the extraordinary. [/SIZE][/FONT]

InLove,

This speaks volumes.

Because it would not be possible without the love and care you have for life. Sometimes it seems the world is so full of high speeches, yet without the love coming through how much does it really matter all the esoteric knowledge.....
I was also once involved in an esoteric school, have been shown amazing things beyond the norm...... Andrew says - none of us know the ultimate purpose - well, I say..... it's all about spiritual evolution and consciousness, but it doesn't mean a thing without love and an attribute of compassion.... the basis of all higher consciousness beyond words is love.


love and peace - c -

 

[Nick the Pilot]

~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~

InLove, you said,

"Okay, doggies are better now."​

"I do realize that my questions may sound as if I am proposing some kind of gauntlet-type challenge."​

--> I can recognize an open-minded person and a closed-minded person a mile away. You are definitely the open-minded type. I always find discussions with open-minded people to be enjoyable (even if they may become challenging discussions.)

"If no particular teaching is required to be believed by any individual Theosophist, why does Theosophy require the individual Christian to hold to certain teachings?"​

--> Theosophy does not require Christians to hold a particular belief. The problem is some Christian teachings have been (according to Theosophy) intentionally altered. Theosophy was specifically created to point out these altered teachings. If Christians desire to keep believing these altered beliefs, Theosophy does not try to stop them.

"But why is Theosophy particularly opposed to individual interpretations within the Christian Tradition?"​

--> Here is a quote from a psychic who is also active in some online Theosophical discussions. This is by a man named Kurt, answering questions about a book he wrote.

"Q: I’m disturbed by what seems to me to be an anti-Christian bias in your book Otherwhere. ​

"A: I like to make a distinction between the teachings of Christianity as recorded in the Bible--which I believe to be a part of the universal spiritual heritage of humankind, along with The Tibetan Book of the Dead, the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, the sayings of the Buddha, and other such scriptures--and the teachings of the Christian church, in any of its many denominations. The latter it seems to me are often influenced by political considerations that may have little to do with genuine spiritual truths. ​

"Some of my visits to Otherwhere have provided me with information that goes against the teachings of the church. I do not believe that they go against the teachings of Christ. Some of those teachings, it seems to me, have been recorded by individuals of lesser spiritual understanding who have distorted them. Others may have been translated in ways that accidentally or intentionally distort their meaning. ​

The content of the Bible itself was a result of decisions made by the church fathers about what to keep in and what to leave out. Such decisions, I believe, were political in nature and may have distorted or at least obscured some of the spiritual truths contained in it." ​

KurtLeland.com: FAQs




--> It is these alterations of teachings for political purposes that Theosophy speaks out against.

"I know that some Christian schools do, but why would Theosophy?"​

--> Theosophy is a set of teachings that promotes certain ideas. For example, as we have discussed before, the Blessed Virgin Mary is seen in Theosophy as not a real person, but the anthropomorphization of a cosmic principle. I feel just as strongly about this belief as any Christian, and if people want to hear them, I will talk about them. The difference (as I have said before), is that, if you disagree with me, I will respect that (and not say you are going to Hell for disagreeing!) Even Theosophists are allowed to disagree, and their disagreeing never leads to any type of Theosophical excommunication.

"Actually, I am never surprised by arguments within any religious or philosophical organization."​

"I mean, debate appears to be largely what philosophy is all about anyway."​

--> Theosophy encourages debate. I feel it is one of the few philosophies in the world that actually does so.

"And religion, in my opinion, is so closely related to philosophy that I am not sure I can really tell the difference much of the time."​

--> The difference between religion and philosophy is actually a fascinating discussion. Maybe we can pick up on it in another thread.

"And I really don’t mind the splitting of hairs as long as I can see a purpose behind it.​

--> God for you!

"There are cases when I think it is counterproductive, but not always."​

--> I think it gets back to open-minded vs. closed-minded. Some of the best religious discussions I have had, have been with non-Theosophists. As long as respect is maintained, it can be a great experience.

"Christianity does not recognize multiple levels of higher consciousness, right? --> I honestly think it depends on (here I go again) which Christian you ask, but then I may not exactly understand what you mean by “multiple levels of higher consciousness”. Are you referring to this as it relates to the concept(s) of reincarnation?"​

--> No. This is not a Christian concept, so let me try to explain. You may have heard of the Astral Plane of Existence. (It is said that we are actually having experiences on the Astral Plane while we are asleep, and these experiences are brought back as dreams.) The Astral Plane is seen (according to Theosophy) as a higher level of existence. I believe Christianity believes in ghosts and lost souls (Theosophy does too), and these souls are said to be literally wandering about on the Astral Plane.


However, the Astral Plane is seen as only the tip of the iceberg. We say there is something called the Mental Plane above the Astral Plane, with its own set of residents. On and on it goes, Plane above Plane, with "souls" residing on each Plane. It is these souls we refer to as "beings of higher consciousness". (Actually, this fits in with Christianity, as Christianity talks about Seraphim, Cherebum (sp), angels, archangels, etc. It is just that Theosophy is a lot more specifc about defining who is who and where they are.) This, then, is the answer to your question: "Beings of higher consciousness" are the angels, archangels, etc, although Theosphy's list is much longer and more complicated than Christianity's list.

"Discuss concepts. Ignore personal attacks. --> I do try to do this (I haven’t always been real good at it)...."​

--> You are doing quite well. Keep up the good work. Every attempt, no matter how small, will show results.

"However, I tend to be more empathetic than is perhaps good for me at times, and this can lead to worry over someone else’s psyche. Who knows? Maybe this is part of my own calling."​

--> There are different kinds of people. You are just that kind of person.



Also, please remember that Buddha told us to follow the Middle Way, which means avoiding extremes. This includes being too good!

"It is rather difficult to relate to a fellow being’s situation without worrying, especially if he or she seems worried."​

--> I think having empathy is a good thing. I am sure you will make a good Guardian Angel. (Are you ready...?)

"Don’t know if that makes any sense the way I have stated it."​

--> It has. Thanks for taking the time to make sure we understand.

 

[InLove]

Hi Andrew--LOL, I am still behind on this thread (not to mention two or three others!)

In basic terms, what we can say after consulting Webster, and also taking a look at the quoted Wikipedia entry, is that esotericism overlaps with mysticism ... but suggests a further progression. Still, just because a person expresses interest in esoteric teachings, does not make that person an Initiate. {And this begs the $64 million question!}

I understand that mysticism is not necessarily esotericism, and I am actually quite happy about that. But as you have pointed out, the two do overlap sometimes. This is what makes me wonder how esoteric knowledge is somehow deemed exclusive to an Initiate with a capital “I”. To me, this is like a Christian saying that one must be baptized with water in a certain way, memorize the catechism, or have last rites administered by a priest before they die in order to be Saved with a capital “S”. (Now before I draw fire from the Christian community, let me just say that I know not all Christians think this, and besides, if you do, it is your business, not mine. I just don’t happen to agree.) Anyway, I am working this post out as I go, so hopefully I will have a better grasp by the time I am finished...

Andrew, you also quoted the following from Wiki:

Another possibility is that such knowledge may be kept secret not by the intention of its protectors, but by its very nature—for example, if it is accessible only to those with the proper intellectual background.

But then you added this comment, quoting from Matthew 7:6:

["Cast ye not your pearls before swine ..."]

I am not sure I understand the connection you are making here. Bear with me, please, but I read this verse and the surrounding passage as an authoritative teaching from Jesus about spiritual knowledge, not intellectual. In fact, the last verse of this chapter ends with the following:

And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine: For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes. –Matthew 7:28-29

When I read the Bible, what I often find is that the teachers of the law are depicted as continually quoting other rabbis when they taught. But Jesus, even though He quoted verses from the Old Testament, didn’t refer to the school of this priest or that one. He spoke through His own authority. I realize you may not glean the same meaning from this as I do, but I wanted to address it since I am trying to better understand your reasoning.

But the portions of Webster's definition which I emphasized in blue, really do help to clarify where much of the confusion may exist, because something accepted by most Theosophists, and by students of the Wisdom in the 20th and 21st Centuries, is that indeed, there is an objective Path of Initiation. And this is something that we all must tread, regardless of our spiritual (or religious) background, and no matter what our outward spiritual observances (or none).

What this means, in terms of `higher' states of awareness, is that such states are perfectly objective. Arguably, and this is something I enjoy discussing, such states are much more objective than our sensory perceptions, not to mention our intellectual assumptions and conclusions, since both of these - as we all know - are subject to question, interpretation, argument, and error ... not to mention what our current mood is, or what particular emotions we are experiencing.

Okay. I’m really trying here. (By the way, I cannot see the blue type for some reason, Andrew. But I can see the bolded text, and I think I may be starting to comprehend what you are saying.) I do appreciate objectivity. And I agree that in “higher” states of awareness (ßIL chokes and sputters in the sincere attempt to employ this phraseology ), what I might call our “spiritual senses” take precedence over our physical senses and assumptions based on former experience of any kind. I’m wondering just out of curiosity—do you think that moods and emotions may sometimes act as catalysts for increased awareness, even though they would not be a part of the more truly awakened spiritual state?

And just consider: While mystical experiences occur for people around the world, no matter the faith or religious background (every tradition has a mystical component, or even several), notice how subjective these kind of experiences tend to be, as witnessed by a Christian contemplative, vs. a Buddhist, or Sufi. I think this raises an excellent point, Deb.

Can we go even further and consider that the individual mystical experience within each of these various Traditions would add yet another layer that might even be more…um…objective. But I would also say that even when an experience is subject to certain belief systems, it may still be mystical in that a person’s understanding may exceed the limits of those systems (and here we get into areas like faith and perhaps grace—well, I tend to go there, anyway. LOL, I must be one of them there Christians after all.) So, like I think you have been saying (and I even think Thomas did, too) that both have value, and there are commonalities, but they are not necessarily the same thing? (Oh, please, don’t let that be the wrong thing for me to write—I don’t want to get into all that again. But I do so want to point out when I see grounds for some agreement there. I could be mistaken, but if I am, we don’t need to re-hash right now.)

What would the spiritual path be like, if there were not Those Who have GONE BEFORE us? To whom would we turn, and where would we find the answers that we seek? What would we do about spiritual guidance, if there were no such thing as enlightened, knowledgable, capable and qualified spiritual Teachers?

Am I begging the question? Perhaps. But you think about it. And the challenge that I make, is simple. If you haven't met, or spoken with, or otherwise experienced the plain & simple REALITY of such Teachers (either plural or singular), then the best you can really do, is to keep silent, and hear what others have to share. This, it seems to me, is the most prudent thing to do ... though of course, we are all free to offer our opinions, and to share what we THINK is the most likely "state of reality," despite our NOT having actually experienced it.

Yeah, silence is often worth much more than gold. Sometimes I think we tend to project our own ideas about what a master teacher really is onto other people, and we wind up assuming they have not experienced this reality, either. So then, we have missed seeing a master at work. I think it happens all the time, and I think this is the basis for much of the Wisdom of the ages—we simply overlook it because we are expecting something else. Preconceptions.

And has this promotion come because I have done favors for my supervisor, or is it not because I have proven myself? In the ideal world (which is surely God's), this is how things work - or so says the esoterict, because we cannot believe in a God of favoritism, operating according to the motto, "You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours." That is something we must reject, for reasons that I hope should be obvious.

That is my hope, too—and actually not just for the esotericist, but all people. This will probably translate differently in different Traditions. For instance, a Christian’s “test”, I would say, would necessarily start with the faith factor, and then continue from that point. But it would be different for, say, a Buddhist, maybe? (I hope I am not over-generalizing here.)

At any rate, these teachings are present, within Christianity, within Judaism, within Islam, as they are within Hindusim, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism & Mazdeanism, and as they existed in every ancient religious and philosophical system. The example in Webster, notice, is not even a contemporary, or ancient religion, it is the Mystery School of PYTHAGORAS. And students of the Ageless Wisdom know ... that Pythagoras was not simply "that great mathematician who gave us certain theorems and formulae," as we are often taught in modern schools. Rather, Pythagoras was the head of a full-fledged Mystery School, and this school, like all legitimate schools, had its various orders, or grades of students, who were Initiated into the Mysteries, stage by stage.

Yes, I have been studying up on the Pythagorean school. Interesting. Can’t say much yet (back to that “silence” thingy). I keep getting caught up in trying to read all that music theory, which, by the way, was the class I hated most besides math, lol. I do like fifths, though. I understand the idea behind the digital tuners, and that works just fine as long as one is not trying to use one to tune a guitar to play with an out-of-tune piano. Then one must play by ear. I am not sure that Pythagoras would appreciate this, but then, like I said, I do not want to project my assumptions onto him.

One can research, quite easily, the objectivity of what I am saying, and soon it will become apparent, that there is no conspiracy being waged by students of the Ageless Wisdom, unless one somehow feels so self-assured and self-righteous as to make oneself the STANDARD against whom & which all others should be judged - and claim the Golden Key of Truth as, "MY decree!"

That is comforting to hear. Interpretation is one thing, but insistence is quite another. And it may not sound like it, but I am very, very aware that there are existing organizations that are much maligned in this world. I cannot go into all that, so enough said on my part.

Well, Andrew, I can't keep up with you! There is so much more that you wrote that I haven't addressed in detail, but maybe what I have written here is enough to continue an exchange of thoughts. It is nice to talk with you again. I hope nothing I've said has been inappropriate.

InPeace,
InLove

 

[Thomas]

He spoke through His own authority.

Hi InLove —

Just wanted to pop in and say that observation, set against the background of Jesus' sociospiritual heritage, is one of the most telling aspects of the New Testament ... and speaks volumes. If indeed He speaks through His own authority, then that authority — in its entirety — is invested in Him. Unwrapping what that means leads one to two conjoined dramatic conclusions, the two mysteries at the heart of the Christian faith, which are themselves one, for the one is inexplicable without the other: Trinity and Incarnation.

Here's a quote from a Christian's blog:

And then Father began his homily. And his homily was about doubt. And he likened doubt to the stone which blocked the entrance to the tomb, and we're powerless to move it away ourselves, we must pray for God to move it for us. How perfect, I thought. And I prayed to God to roll away my stone of doubt.

And I was confirmed. And I received the Blessed Sacrament. And as I received it I was not concentrating on the fact that it was the body and blood of Christ. Nor was I at all doubting whether it was so. My mind was completely clear. I took it, ate it, drank it, and returned to my pew. I knelt, and prayed to God to strengthen my faith.

Many other things rolled through my mind this evening. Such as how unworthy I am to be chosen to enter the Church. So many people, with a faith in God so much stronger than mine, with fire for Christ burning so much hotter, yet they haven't received his Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity. Perhaps they never will. And here I am, an utter wretch, crippled with doubts and confusion, my faith in God forever oscillating between fringes of ecstasy and the brink of nihilism, my fire for Christ is like a trick birthday candle, far too small, but I won't allow to go out. A nanoscopic fraction of a mustard seed of faith. But however weak and crippled my faith is, whatever faith itself means, whatever it is I have that won't allow me give up is pointing toward the Catholic Church, my spiritual home, and the sacraments, my channel of grace. Truly Lord, I am unworthy to receive you. But only say the word, and I'll be healed.

Mysterium Crucis

Thomas

 

[InLove]

Thanks, Thomas and Ciel for your thoughts. You are both very kind and a blessing to me. And I enjoyed the link, as well, Thomas. I am so intrigued by all the different and similar views here.

Thanks to Nick, too. I'm planning on responding to your last post, but it may take me a little while. I love the animated emoticons, too! I'm kind of into that myself....

InPeace,
InLove

 

[Nick the Pilot]

InLove, You said,

"This is what makes me wonder how esoteric knowledge is somehow deemed exclusive to an Initiate with a capital “I”.
​

--> It is said it must be kept exclusive because it is dangerous knowledge:

"There were portions of the Secret Science that for incalculable ages had to remain concealed from the profane gaze. But this was because to impart to the unprepared multitude secrets of such tremendous importance, was equivalent to giving a child a lighted candle in a powder magazine." (The Secret Doctrine vol 1 p. xxxv)
​

It is felt only Initiates can be trusted with this knowledge.

 

[taijasi]

Apologies, Deb, but I had to scrap a reply ... it was too lengthy, and Nick did a marvelous job of answering the Initiate question with brevity. I would only add, that the "secret" of atomic energy (even in its initial, destructive application) was released to Humanity - as an example of just the sort of knowledge which would otherwise not be permitted before we have overcome certain temptations & weaknesses ... and proven ourselves capable and trustworthy of putting such knowledge to positive, creative uses.

What made things different, during WWII, such that the Hierarchy (Christ and the Masters - working especially through the 5th Ray Ashram of Concrete Science) chose to assist the Allies in discovering the necessary formulas in advance of the Axis Powers?

The answer should be obvious enough. So many of us detest war, and violence, yet surely we can recognize that what was happening in WWII at the hands of the Nazis was something very wrong, and ominous for the future of the entire planet.

Certainly in smaller conflicts, even in national crises, it cannot be said that "the Hierarchy takes sides." But during WWII, the very future of the race - and planet - hung in the balance. The Forces of Light therefore assisted the Allies in seeking to conquer the Axis Powers, because the latter - with Hitler and his group of evil-minded associates - had definitely invoked the Forces of Materialism ... and evil of an unprecedented sort, and magnitude, was flowing into our planet.

The average person who objects that "what happened in Japan was despicable, inexcusable" ... has NOT stopped to consider what was the alternative. Rather the entire planet be enslaved by the forces of darkness, in the truest possible sense of that expression ... and the Divine Plan be offset for many thousands of years (if not entirely)? No, we have experienced one such disaster already, in Humanity's ancient past (the MOON) ... and this must not be repeated.

The loss of the form - of the body as a means of expression - is a setback for the soul ... and thus, even beyond the obvious suffering entailed, the use of the atomic bomb was certainly a tragedy indeed, even from an esoteric standpoint. But from the larger perspective, it saved our planet, literally.

Now that Humanity most veritably IS that child in the powder magazine ... we had better learn WELL, and FAST, how to hold our lighted candle - and guard it. The Esoteric knowledge cannot disappear at this stage, and the Restoration of the Mysteries has been meant to accompany Christ's outward Reappearance all along. If other civilizations, all across the galaxy, have somehow managed to pull themselves together, survive this stage in their planets' evolutions, and cooperate with the Divine ... then SO CAN WE.

It's not as if we haven't the guidance, or plenty of example(s) of how to go about it ...

Also, it just happens to be the case that a growing number of individuals and groups are working with a combined approach from the Head and from the Heart, to bring the New Presentation of (Eternal, Ageless) Ideas into expression. Some of us will resonate to this more easily, and readily, than others - yet each & every one of us has the opportunity to assist, and to cooperate, and thereby to grow both personally & spiritually in the process. That's the Beauty of it!

Love and Light,

~Andrew

 

[taijasi]

By the way, the Path of Initiation is known to every tradition. Each religion just has a different motif for expressing it, including varying symbolisms - with common & overlapping elements, yet certainly also with elements which are unique to each one.

Within Buddhism, for example, Shakyamuni taught using the metaphor of a Stream ... and those who had taken the 1st Major Initiation were called Sotapatti, or Stream-Entrants.

In Hinduism, the same stage is called Parivrajaka, and it means, the Wanderer, or one who has forsaken the apparent security of this world, in order to seek greater spiritual understanding and live the spiritual life. This is epitomized in the ideal of the Sannyasin, though certainly not every individual is capable - either of living that stage in outward, personal life, or of reaching such a spiritual goal (1st degree Initiate) in one, given lifetime.

St. Paul, for the benefit of the early church, often spoke in his Letters of being "Babes in Christ," and he did this because of his familiarity with the existing Mystery Traditions of Greece. Already ancient, these traditions have epitomized the High Walk of Discipleship in their legends for thousands of years, with Herakles (Hercules) ranking among the Greatest of Greece's early Initiates.

Thoth-Hermes, said by some to have been an earlier incarnation of Shakyamuni Buddha (Siddharta Gautama), was also a great Egyptian, as well as Greek Initiate. Other heroes, such as Perseus, Theseus and Odysseus, can also be spoken of as Initiates ... or individuals who, early on, have attained to the Spiritual Goal of Perfection which awaits us all.

Some embark upon that difficult journey earlier than others, and such men were Christ, and Buddha, yet this is regarded in the Ancient Wisdom teachings as our Destiny - and not something reserved for the privileged few.

"Many are called, but few are chosen," refers to the same spiritual truth expressed by the Theosophical Masters ~125 years ago:

An Adept is the rare efflorescene of a generation of enquirers ... and to become one, he must obey the inward impulse of his soul, irrespective of the prudential considerations of worldly science or sagacity.​

It should be added, that the Path is open to each & all who seek.

Those who earnestly desire to tread this Path FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEING OF FURTHER ASSISTANCE TO THE PLAN ... that is, to assist the Great Ones in Their dedicated task (at this stage of the Plan) of Spiritual Service to Humanity ... ONLY such Souls will find the doors opening to them. This is a natural safeguard, such that those of us who are merely curious, will not meet with any peril. The Masters do not need additional devotees, nor are They the least bit interested in going about proving Themselves to the skeptics.

Does this begin to make sense? I would point out here, that Esotericism and the Initiatory Path is not about "saving souls," and thus there will be a natural and understandable tension with any ideology, or presentation of religious ideas, which seeks this business of soul-saving as its ultimate goal, or raison d'etre.

It is not that the Masters are not intimately concerned about our Spiritual progress. Certainly They are; and the epitome of the relationship between a Master and His closest pupils is that which was shown 2000 years ago between Christ and John the Beloved. Yet this is not favoritism, and the Master loves each and every member of Humanity alike.

We are known to the Christ as souls, and not (only, or primarily) as an evanescent, temporary personality. Apologetics, or some kind of insistence that I am my body, will not move me one molecule from my own, hard-won appreciation ... that I HAVE a physical body, but I am not that body, I am a Soul. I HAVE an emotional body, but I am not my emotions, I am a Soul. I HAVE a mental body, but I am not my thoughts (or mind), I am a Soul.

We can discuss metaphysics elsewhere ... this is the teaching of the Ageless Wisdom, and I believe the equivalent emphasis will be found in every spiritual tradition, REGARDLESS of the time period under consideration, and regardless of other, complementary teachings in that tradition. Sadly, there are attempts to short-circuit, bypass, or just plain defeat this sublime, Spiritual Truth ... and however well-intended, these efforts will fail.

A vehicle, the upadhi, must be mastered. This occurs with full, willing effort by the denizen therein, and comes about only through earnest self-discipline ... and by leading a life of utmost PURITY and self-sacrifice. All of this is JUST PRECURSORY, a natural and necessary PREPARATION for treading the real Spiritual Path ... or at least, the Path of Initiation.

Those who move about amongst us, Baptized in the Esoteric sense of that word ("Once-Returners" in Buddhism, or "He Who has Built a Hut" in Hinduism) ... are greatly and increasingly empowered, precisely because their lives are PURE, and they can handle the additional inflow of spiritual energy (Love, Light, and Power). Even so, every single impurity is brought to the surface, and the lives of such individuals tend to be exceedingly difficult, and trying - as they learn to live, only to SERVE.

Those who move on, and become Transfigured (3rd Degree Initiates), are exactly as was Jesus of Nazareth ... prior to His birth in Bethlehem. These are not so numerous as the Baptized, these "Never-Returners" and SWANS (Hamsa) ... but chances are we have all met a few of them. These are the people who can truly think, for they have been spiritually purified, have stood before The One Initiator ("May the Lord lift His Countenance upon you" ... "Blessed are the pure of heart, for they shall see God.") ... and such individuals permanently bear the higher vibration (on EVERY level of their being) of being in God's Presence. Even Moses was not such an Initiate when first he encountered God, THUS he had to be protected atop Mt. Sinai, and could experience the Lord, but not see Him until a later stage.

The Arhats, as Buddhism speaks of them, or the GREAT SWANS (ParaMaHAMSA, such as Yogananda) of Hinduism, equal the Crucified and Risen Jesus of Nazareth. Initiates experienced this before Jesus, and certainly several have passed the trials, since. But these are High Initiates, well on the way to becoming Adepts (5th Initiation) ... and they are not so numerous in the world, as yet.

Brother Bruce discusses at length the unique contributions of the Christ, and even if I would disagree about certainly Anthroposophical fundamentals (Christ and the Bodhisattva are one, as I see it - and Jesus of Nazareth was Jeschu ben Pandira, plain & simple) ... what I believe we can agree upon is that Christ holds a unique position in relation to Humanity today.

As an esotericist, I have come to understand this position as Bodhisattva, or World Teacher ... and also as the Head (and Heart) of the Occult Hierarchy, or Inner/Spiritual Government of the World. Yes, we're "in good hands," but Christ does not do for us, what we ourselves are not willing to DO for each other. Some teachings, such as those of the First Two Commandments and the Golden Rule - as well as the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path of Buddhism - are still fresh in our collective memory, yet how can the Christ possibly come and give us NEW teachings, when we have yet to apply the existing Lessons?

The Ageless Wisdom indicates that NO ONE, including God Almighty, has the ability - or the desire, let alone the intention - to come along and contradict my free will ... and MAKE of me an unwilling slave, or servant. However, just to that extent that I recognize and express my willingness to cooperate, doors can and will open. The natural, normal and desired progression ... is for each and every one of us, to set foot upon the spiritual path - and this is hoped for as the willing choice and sacrifice of every soul, as that soul becomes mature (spiritually progressed) enough to see the value in this. The slow, sure method will ultimately lead us all where God intends, but at the present moment, Humanity faces a CRISIS of unprecedented proportion (trite or cliche as that may sound) ... and thus every single contribution we make helps to pave the way as never before).

Christ's Reapperance is immiment - and esotericsts insist on this word, because, as presented in the Buddhist tradition, the Bodhisattva awaits "in Tushita Heaven," but not in some far-off celestial sphere. "At the right hand of the Father" means to me, that Christ has had the affairs of the world well in hand ... not as a controller of destinies, but rather, as the Guide and Supervisior of our Spiritual Growth and education as a collective Human SOUL. He is the Saoshyant known to Zarathustrians, the IMAM Mahdi of Muslims, and the Kalki Avatara of Hindus.

Christ's Reappearance is heralded, and He "comes not alone," since this time the world is ready for the gradual Externalization of the Hierarchy. This means, that all those Masters of the Wisdom (and "Lords of Compassion," as Master Jesus, Serapis, et al are technically called) ... the ones in Whom Thomas does not believe ... THEY are coming with the Christ, as His avant-garde.

Already several Ashrams have made much progress in outward, physical expression ... and even in the early 20th Century the Master R. was quite active in the Western USA, but His Ashram came under attack (this was during the Interlude between the two halves of the World War, which esotericists understand as a recapitulation of the Atlantean conflict, between the Forces of Light, and the lords of the Dark Face). Plans were delayed, but already a Synthetic Ashram is working increasingly in the mental, astral and etheric physical world ... being a combined effort of three Ashrams of the Great Ones.

The discomfort, the uncertitude, the natural enough resistance, even to the point of direct, personal attacks - episodes of scapegoating and in fact, the use of any means available (subtle attacks can be far worse than outward physical means) ... all of this is no surprise, and it will continue. The existing power structures, political, "religious," ideological, are all - truly - being subjected to energies which are ... overwhelming, to say the least.

A good parallel is the US (and European) automobile industry, based as it is, upon petroleum. As the planet NECESARRILY shifts to a cleaner, more efficient, and globally available means of propulsion (energy) ... the existing power structure will fight tooth, claw & nail to maintain its stranglehold on the economy. Europe has begun to adjust much sooner than the US, but even here, there are baby steps as the big automotive corporations and stockholders in the oil companies allow a couple $$ here and there to go toward the research & development which decades ago could have saved our planet. Is it too late? Who's to say. But this is only a parallel, and technically, this too is a reflection of the inner struggle whereby the forces of Materialism still seek to oppose to the very last, the Forces of Love and Light.

There is no scapegoating here that will deceive anyone whose Eye is opened, and in sync with his or her Heart. Most of us are well aware that the world is not just one giant set of dualities. Good and evil, in the way that they have often been depicted for the last several thousand years, do not exist at polar opposites. To the extent that they do so, we are dealing with the OUTER world of "concrete reality," which esotericists call the world of appearances. In the East, this is called Maya, because relative to a greater world of Spiritual Verities, it IS illusion. In an absolute sense, the dualities (hot, cold, good, bad, negative, positive, male, female, etc.) ... are a PART of the bigger picture. But that bigger picture includes ALL such dualities, and resolves them.

Christ said, "I am the Alpha and the Omega." This is equivalent to the acorn, and the oak. An acorn is not "bad," nor is the oak a diametrically opposed "good." The opposites do not apply. And yet, each of us is somewhere on that journey, in between the stage of acorn and Oak. The metaphor of a large, beautiful Garden is a helpful one ... but if we borrow it, it becomes our responsibility to remember to do our own weeding. When help is needed, it will come, but not for the one who is unwilling to do his fair share.

I've rambled a bit, because this is the esotericism I have come to know and love. These are the teachings that make sense to me, though this is just the tip of the iceberg, to use the expression Nick recently used. I'll share something else tomorrow ... and I'll give your recent post more of a reply than I've given it, Deb. So far I've offered short shrift, so I've plenty of catching up of my own to do!

Peace,

~Andrew

 

[Thomas]

By the way, the Path of Initiation is known to every tradition. Each religion just has a different motif for expressing it, including varying symbolisms - with common & overlapping elements, yet certainly also with elements which are unique to each one.

Brava! That's precisely the point I made when I started this thread! Have we come full circle?

We are known to the Christ as souls, and not (only, or primarily) as an evanescent, temporary personality. Apologetics, or some kind of insistence that I am my body, will not move me one molecule from my own, hard-won appreciation ... that I HAVE a physical body, but I am not that body, I am a Soul. I HAVE an emotional body, but I am not my emotions, I am a Soul. I HAVE a mental body, but I am not my thoughts (or mind), I am a Soul.

Brava again! This is why the metaphysics of the 'person' is central to Christianity, and non-discardable. The body, be it physical, mental, emotional, etc., is the form of the soul in that domain — thus on one level the soul is above all its manifesting forms, but neverthess is them — not an entity that occupies a shell, but the actualy existing thing that mediates experience via its own will and the sensory date of the body involved. (NB: This is where St Paul draws a distinction between the Greek world and the Christian world — he knew the Greek Mysteries, but he was a Christian through-and-through‚

We can discuss metaphysics elsewhere ... this is the teaching of the Ageless Wisdom, and I believe the equivalent emphasis will be found in every spiritual tradition, REGARDLESS of the time period under consideration, and regardless of other, complementary teachings in that tradition. Sadly, there are attempts to short-circuit, bypass, or just plain defeat this sublime, Spiritual Truth ... and however well-intended, these efforts will fail.

Sadly this has been my very real experience of New Age Hermeticism.

On the rest, we know only too well where we 'agree to disagree' — but might I ask, if you do accept a certain uniqueness of symbol, and what that signifies esoterically, might there not be room to argue that it is that unique aspect of Christianity in this context that has been overlooked?

It seems to me that what is a unique expression is assumed to be false because it doesn't tally with the Theosophist reading of other traditions? Does this not put you in danger of claiming infallible knowledge of every tradition?

There is also something of an old chestnut with regard to Theosophy's view of Christian doctrine — all other traditions would 'agree to disagree' with the fullness of Christian doctrine, but none have ever claimed the doctrine to be false, spurious or fabricated — that accusation is, I think, unique to Thesophy. Such accusations of the falsification of sacra doctrina, really need to be substantiated. It is unfortunate that some critics, such as the psychic Nick quotes, make accusations without any evidence other than a total dependence on the infallibility and judgement of the critic — which is always questionable, and undermines the credibility of their testimony.

Otherwise I am obliged to accept such comments as a dogma, which seems contra to Theosophic thinking?

And as any esoterist knows, and as Bruce has also pointed out — the 'Otherworld' is not infallible, and its discernment is an art as well as a science.

What I do wonder about is something of a mixed message — and maybe this is because, as I understand you Nick, there is no certitude ... no, perhaps too dogmatic a word? ... no assertion of doctrine in Theosophy, yet if indeed 'there is no religion higher than truth', then is not truth itself rendered subjective by the absence of any assertation?

You seem to claim that truth is accessible to all, on the one hand, and yet insist on the idea of the initiate, and an elite, on the other — Nick does the same, to a more explicit degree. Is this an example of a non-obligatory message of Theosophy?

Thomas

 

[taijasi]

Thomas ... I'm glad we agree on at least a couple of points. It might not surprise you that as I typed the line about motifs and symbolism, common vs. unique elements, I had a feeling it might resonate.

The question from there, as you have brought to light under the bit about Soul vs. upadhi ... is where do we go from our point(s) of agreement?

And it seems to me, that you wish to highlight what is unique to Christianity, and of especial value to those who choose to tread the esoteric path - while remaining (more or less) true to exoteric Christianity.

Such a group will, as Nick and I have pointed out many a time, include both Theosophists and otherwise students of the Ageless Wisdom, not to mention additional Perennialists who may choose to disagree with various of the Theosophical assertions or authorities (such as yourself, Bruce Michael, Earl, path_of_one, and others).

The goal, as I see it, consists not in trying to form one giant amalgamation - or forced syncretism - of spiritual beliefs, teachings, schools and constitutent followers ... but, at least for students of the Ageless Wisdom tradition, in exploring whether or not a Core Wisdom Teaching has in fact existed on our planet all along.

Still, the gradual evolution of One World Religion is something which I am convinced is coming about already and as according to (the Divine) Plan. This, and nothing less, is what I understand by such New Testament verses as John 10:16, and the affirmation that a house, divided against itself, cannot stand (Matthew 12:25), as well as in related passages Luke 11:34 & Matthew 6:22, not to mention I Corinthians 12:12 -

"For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ."​

In fact, it is just by examining and comparing such passages, that we can plainly see (I would hope), that Christ's earlier Ministry here among us was already intending to precipitate precisely the kind of global religious unification which most poeple I know advocate and strive toward.

This is not a new idea, and it is not some kind of secret, conspiratorial, underhanded New Age agenda ... whereby some specific SET of religious doctrinces or wishy-washy, purely theoretical platitudes are intended to replace age-old traditions, liturgies - or unique & specific claims to spiritual revelation.

This is the kind of straw-manning of Theosophical and related movements, even of the `New Age' presentation (a stepped-down version of esoteric teachings, as I see it) ... which turns my stomach, and thus, when I see it occur - I am duty and honor-bound to speak out!

It seems to me that what is a unique expression is assumed to be false because it doesn't tally with the Theosophist reading of other traditions? Does this not put you in danger of claiming infallible knowledge of every tradition?

I don't think that is what's being said at all!

Rather, the Theosophist, and student of the Ageless Wisdom tradition, asserts that:

1. There is but One Great Source for all Spiritual Revelation for our planet. It is from this Divine Center (of Love, Light and Truth) that all Great Teachers, Saviours, Avatars and Prophets go out.
2. Therefore, we can say that Spiritual Revelation is the gift of a Loving God to all of Humanity - regardless of race (or ethnic origin), geographical location, the time period in which one lives, or other circumstantial conditions.
3. And finally, as in fact every religious tradition has expressed, there is a body of Knowers, of Wise Sages, Whom and Which has always been, and continues to be, the Keepers of the Divine Plan ... whereby God seeks to Guide Humanity, and lead every single child of God back to the Heavenly Source whence we have all originated.

One problem that sometimes arises, unfortunately, is that some particular religious tradition, or rather - a denomination or school constituting some small subset of followers from within a greater tradition - insists that it alone holds and guards THE "Divine Revelation," AS IF there is only ONE such revelation ... or as if their own communication/communion with God means inherently more than that of some other group of followers.

And this has been the bone of contention between Theosophical types, and students of the Ageless Wisdom from DAY ONE ... which goes back well before the modern Theosophical Movement in the 19th Century. It goes back many, many centuries ... yet students of the Ageless Wisdom can show examples from in fact, thousands of years ago, even predating ALL of the currently known or extant world religions.

You see, Thomas, the shoe is actually on the other foot. Does not `Domine Iesus' prove my point incontrovertibly? NOT the (scapegoated) Theosophists, but in fact, precisely these warring members who would otherwise constitute ONE, United Body ... these are the folks who are claiming, "WE have THE Truth, DO NOT look elsewhere, ALL OTHERS are liars, THOSE paths to Salvation are slower, more prone to error ... or just dead wrong!!!"

The Theosophist, or at least every single one I've had the honor to have known or met, says just the opposite. But let's quote The Proclamation of Baha'u'llah (p. 114), from a post by BruceDLimber today on the Baha'i forum, in making my point:

"There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God. The difference between the ordinances under which they abide should be attributed to the varying requirements and exigencies of the age in which they were revealed. All of them, except a few which are the outcome of human perversity, were ordained of God, and are a reflection of His Will and Purpose. Arise and, armed with the power of faith, shatter to pieces the gods of your vain imaginings, the sowers of dissension amongst you. Cleave unto that which draweth you together and uniteth you."​

Thomas, if it's the Theosophists with whom you have so much disagreement and problem, then what do you say to the quote above? What about those darn, pesky Baha'i's, seeking after precisely the same Unity, based upon precisely the same affirmations, as the Theosophists?

Are you prepared to level your canons (sic) AGAINST them, as well, and sow dissension ... even while increasing numbers of followers, and members of every group & faith, tradition & teaching, all begin to seek Unity, and join together?

{Speaking of Unity, I got an offer in the mail for a free issue of Their magazine ... which I've sent off for ...}

~+~+~

As far as the assertion of doctrine in Theosophy, it is not that there is no such, it is that - one is free to take it or leave it. One will not be condemned, ridiculed, excommunicated (!), or told that s/he will burn in eternal hellfire ... OR that s/he has just lost favor with God, or distanced oneself from the Divine Presence ... simply because one chooses to travel one's OWN spiritual path. You see, THIS - is precisely what Theosophy encourages!

As for this Path, which leads straight to the Heart of God, Whom shall we believe, as we seek guidance, information and greater Strength, along our Journey? Those who have speculations as to what that Path might be like, or Those Who, having gone before us, know PRECISELY the nature of the Journey we are on?

Having already attained to the goal as taught us in Ephesians 4:13, the Great Ones offer Their assistance ... without which we can but flounder and falter, if we manage to progress at all. Why do They help us? Because They are the very expression of God's Love upon our Planet. Hierarchy, as defined in the Ageless Wisdom teachings, is the "Heart chakra" of Planet Earth. They are Christ and His Church, and if we have gaps in our understanding, then let us do as we are encouraged ... LET US ASK QUESTIONS.

It is when, and because, the ecclesiastical authorities throughout the centuries have discouraged - even FORBIDDEN - free inquiry ... assserting their OWN presumed, and false authority, also punishing such free inquiry with the above mentioned consequences - even to the extremes of torture and death ... it is because of ALL THIS, that men such as myself choose to speak out against the false church, insisting that there is a better way.

And we speak, not from a sense of false or vain hope, nor even simply because we think that surely there must exist a straighter, narrower path. It is because we know, and because we have known, both Those who tread that Path ... and, to whatever extent, the Path itself. And our direct testimony, however incomplete or subject to the errors of our human imperfections, is nevertheless indication enough for the earnest seeker (who may not, as yet, have witnessed what we have witnessed) - that the search IS WORTH the effort, and that the Journey IS WORTH the sacrifice.

I cannot speak, as one who has reached the Goal, and say, "Fear not, do not hesitate." If anything, I would caution those who are a bit too carefree, or do not find themselves ready to make a commitment. I would encourage inquiry, and self-education, but I would suggest prudence, and a serious - though optimistic and positive attitude - as one begins (or continues) the Search.

Had I reached the end of the line, I feel confident that I could say much of this, and also add to my testimony that no sacrifice is too great ... as we are trading the temporal for the Eternal, the lesser for the Greater, the non-self for the Self, and needless suffering & illusion for Truth, clarity and Immortality.

Namaskar

 

[taijasi]

There are times, rare times, when I feel that - because of the nature, the subject, of conversation ... "winning" the battle of words can actually become a priority.

Often, almost always, it's not what we're really here for. It may even be the last thing that actually matters.

And there are times, plenty of times, when I have realized (here at CR, or elsewhere), that perhaps the conflict or contention was really just an issue of semantics, or perspective, or simple human misunderstanding.

But as I finished my previous post, I realized - this turns out to be one of the few times when the battle of words, is in fact, the battle of Truth over illusion, or Truth over falsehood.

Inasmuch as this is the case, I am not trying to be disagreeable. I represent no earthly organization(s), and therefore, my agenda - to the extent that it is not about "saving face," or "just winning an argument" - will not be that of someone who is defending a creed, a specific doctrine, a body of believers and their traditions, or even a great Prophet, even where this Prophet has helped facilitate the Divine Plan ... to whatever degree, in some form or fashion.

There is something, and Someone, to Whom and which, I am pledged and committed, however poorly I may at times live up to my obligations. And I have learned, that to recognize and address any one of the Great Ones, is truly to recognize and address all of the Hierarchy - that is, every "other" Master.

In my mind, and my understanding, the person who sees the Great Ideal in Jesus of Nazareth ... even if that person fails to recognize it elsewhere, or within any other living being, nevertheless that person does have experience, and contact, with his or her Master. One day, s/he may discover that his or her own Master ... was not, and is not, Jesus of Nazareth at all!

And the same will be true of Sri Krishna, or the Buddha, Mohammad, Zoroaster, etc.

But because the devotee, and the student of world religions, or of some specific religious tradition ... has contacted the Divine Ideal, existing manifest within the Saviour or Avatar, as the object of his or her devotion (or attention), the connection has been made, regardless, and God, on High, is Aware.

Everything else, at this point, becomes secondary. Specific doctrinal differences, between or even amongst, the various and numerous world faiths and religious traditions ... are a matter of importance, but not of primary importance. For God, there are only the many, beautiful Children ... each unique, yet One, within the Divine Mind, Heart or bosom.

We can certainly discuss secondary points; and I enjoy that, too, sometimes.

But if we do not begin - with the a priori Truth (recognized, or not, and this may be our problem) ... that ALL SOULS are ONE SOUL, fundamentally, foundationally, spiritually and eternally ... then no amount of arguing, witnessing, rationalizing, or gabbing, is going to bring us to this innate, if as yet unawakened, recognition (and thus, agreement).

It is not, you see, just a good idea, or some kind of happy platitude, much less an interesting piece of theological or metaphysical conjecture. That, I'm afraid, belongs over on the philosophy forums, but certainly this is a valid stage on our journey ... as our inherent Unity (and relationship with God) isn't necessarily intuitively obvious, much less a part of our everyday, sense and cognitive experience.

The esotericist, at least in terms of the Ageless Wisdom tradition, and presumably the great majority of Theosophists, are precisely such individuals who have moved past the stage of utter doubt and insistent skepticism ... and have thus begun, in however preliminary a mode or fashion, to recognize the above primary point, regarding our inherent Unity, and the Universality of God's Revelation to mankind.

The secondary points, of course, remain of great interest, but so long as I am approaching the subject of possible religious cooperation as purely an ecumenical, or anthropological, or philosophically speculative one, I will never quite see eye to eye with those who have accepted certain things a priori.

This does, and necessarily will, sound elitist, especially to those who pride themselves on their great amount of learning, many years of experience - even in Interfaith endeavors, or perhaps researching, discussing, even lecturing upon esoteric topics. However, there is no rule anywhere which says, that just because one has an interest in these things, this person will necessarily be a "convert," or suddenly gain an epiphany into the kind of primary Truth(s) I am talking about.

Given enough time, and certain sincere dedication, focus, and above all, selfless, altrustic commitment ... it is safe to say, awakening will, and does occur. But just to the extent that this is genuine ALTRUISM in action, and not just the seeking of knowledge for the sake of knowledge, or some form of worldy pursuit (however veiled & subtle) ... to that extent, one's spiritual awakening can progress with amazing rapidity, and as the Great Ones have told us, MANY lifetimes can be lived, as it were, within the space of a single, albeit difficult, lifetime - full of trials, tests and struggle, but of immeasurable spiritual reward.

And the Purpose for all of this? What is that again? To achieve SALVATION for one's own Soul?

No Thomas, No Deborah, No ... for anyone not familiar with the teaching, that WE are the incarnation OF our Soul, and the latter is not "ours" to "do with" as we please. How can I, the temporal/temporary, mortal and imperfect man (or woman), possibly determine the fate or destiny, of a BEING - complete with its OWN Mind, it's OWN Heart, its OWN forms of expression, and in fact its OWN entire Spiritual Evolution ... just because that Soul has taken on a specific burden, and made a sacrifice - out of a Love for me, much as I love and accept the responsibility of caring for a pet dog or cat?

The Ageless Wisdom, with an entirely different "theology" of the Soul - and thus a soteriology which is almost completely at odds with the Judeo-Christian - reorients the student to the more accurate (though not the "ultimately" True) state of affairs. It is my Soul which has made the sacrifice, and devoted itself, through countless incarnations, to "bearing with me" - through thick and thin - with neither judgment nor condemnation, but only genuine, abiding Love. And for this reason, it is (sometimes) known among esotericists as the Christ Principle.

If, and when, at that point in my journey where I have demonstrated such receptivity to the influence of the Soul, and such willingness to cooperate with the Spiritual Ideal(s) which my Soul literally embodies (and thus mediates to me, from on High) ... if at such a point, I can demonstrate to the onlooking Body of Humanity's Guides, that I am ready for the Path of Disicpleship, THEN and then only, might I hope to come into direct acquaintance with a Master or Representative of the Hierarchy, or even, if I am fortunate, with the Great One Whom I might come to call, my Master.

Sadly, those who are clearly in no position to make such assertions, save that they themselves have not had such a direct experience, nevertheless feel themselves gifted with some kind of spiritual authority to make all sorts of proclamations, and foolish claims, that such wise, loving individuals do not exist ... and that in fact, their followers are either deluded, deceived, or perhaps just demented.

And remember, when one's commitment, above all else, is simply the defending of the status quo, and the upholding of one's own, cherished and sacred religious tradition ... regardless of the facts, and at all costs, then unfortunately, the Emissaries of the Brotherhood of Adepts do, quite often, suffer - whether it be imprisonment, torture, and crucifixion, or just the usual slandering, gossip and ridicule.

It would be helpful, of course, if the diehard skeptic could himself, or herself, witness just such a `Great One,' in person ... so that s/he was in a better position to make such sweeping statements as, "Oh, these beings are just phantoms, chimeras of an overactive imagination." I would think that for the true rationalist, certain experiences and events would force him to withdraw this false accusation, and affirm its opposite ... perhaps even leading to a questioning of his very loyalties.

After all, if Galileo cannot even be acquitted for his great crimes against Humanity, the Church, God and Truth, even here at the turn of the 21st Century ... do we really expect to find, when all is said and done, that WE HAVE NOT been decieved - EVEN IF unintentionally - about ... uhh, errr, well, you know, a couple or so, mmmm, spiritual - things???

When Christ came before, it was Judaism, the existing tradition, age-old and encrusted ... which He taught us to question, to examine, and to REJECT ... IF and when, we found that this man-made religion contradicted and undermined our God-given teachings, understanding and authority.

And so we did, with great consequences ... Christ Himself experiencing the swordpoint - NOT in the hands of the Roman authorities, but of the Jewish Sanhedrin.

History repeats itself. Bear WITNESS.

This is a familiar tale. In the East, the great religion of Hindusim, with the Brahmans encrusted in their austerities, chained by millennia of ritual, and up to their ears in dead-letter interpretation ... balked at what the Buddha had to say, and history also records that when Issa traveled East, he evoked the wrath of the Hindu authorities, for precisely the same reason that the Sanhedrin had him murdered.

It does not matter. Fast forward, or rewind, you will find that this is ever the case in the history of our planet.

So what is more important, emphasizing our differences ... or focusing on the similiarities?

If we do one, we may never finally come together. If we choose the other, we risk the continued OUTRAGE of the authorities, and shall certainly upset the ecclesiasts, for THEY HAVE FOUGHT HARD to build their traditions, spilling much blood over the centuries, and have squeezed the common man at every opportunity to build their empire.

Some good has been done, yes, much of it by individuals, here and there, often with no organizational affliation whatsoever ... OR by men who, while not wishing to "toss the baby out with the bathwater," nevertheless risked (and WON) excommunication, torture, or death - not just to make a point (though Galileo seemed to have been onto something, eh?), but to build Christ's Church. And thus St. Francis labored out of Love, and Christ's Church was built.

Christ's Church is built today, even though many of the carpenters are not Christians. Either we understand this, or we have much, much to learn.

But becoming open to criticism, and accepting that there are ERRORS, STILL in need of correction ... THIS is not a sign of weakness; it is a sign of MATURITY. Humility, and a willingness to learn and grow; THIS is how Christ taught His Apostles to go out and move amidst the world. And by reaching the people where they were, instead of dolling out rote sermons on the Celestial Hierarchies, or Heaven's Greatest Mysteries.

I may sometimes forget my role, I will admit ... OF COURSE I do!

But just because I must speak to the man on the bus about his musical taste, or what he did with his family this past 4th of July, does not mean I am not seeking to connect with him spiritually. Yet, if I am judged later, and the decision made regarding my awareness of esoteric teachings, based upon this one conversation with that man on the bus, will it appear that I am well-versed, or will it not seem that I was just another guy?

The latter will seem to be the case, and it's true enough, no matter what I know. But why would the Apostles venture forth casting their "pearls" before "swine" ... just as a matter of habit, and without the least bit of interest in the level of awareness, and the overall receptivity of the audience in question?

And yet, as if we ourselves cannot gain insight into such events, we still insist on things like, "There was but one Gospel, and one doctrine, and it was taught to all alike, and there were no secrets - certainly no esoteric body of teachings ... but in fact, ALL WAS IN PLAIN SIGHT."

This begs the very question, does it not? All is in plain sight, yes, for him who hath the eyes to see it, the ears to hear it ... even the Kingdom of Heaven, should he be so perceptive. Christ saw it, and He revealed it to the Apostles, just as the Buddha had shown His bhikkus, and Sri Krishna had shown His followers. EVERY Teacher, when the time is right, reveals this to His student(s). And it is always ... here for us to see. RIGHT here.

+-+-+-+

I could not begin to understand Esoteric Truth in terms of the more Eastern myths, stories and motifs. The symbols, too, are more than I have ever been able to grasp. If I had that degree of knowledge, then like St. Paul (or Philo Judaeus), I too would be Initiate.

The most I can claim, is that I aspire toward such understanding, and that the Path of Service is the only Path I wish to tread. No effort is wasted, even in my shortcomings, if I am willing to learn from my mistakes, and apply the lessons from there on out.

Love and Light,

~Andrew

 

[Thomas]

Hi Andrew —

We could go through this point by point, but I think that the 'carbon footprint' of our combined posts would actually register somewhere! So I shall just give overview comments, for the sake of brevity.

Thomas ... I'm glad we agree on at least a couple of points. It might not surprise you that as I typed the line about motifs and symbolism, common vs. unique elements, I had a feeling it might resonate ... the question from there ... is where do we go from our point(s) of agreement?

Interseting observation.

And it seems to me, that you wish to highlight what is unique to Christianity, and of especial value to those who choose to tread the esoteric path - while remaining (more or less) true to exoteric Christianity.

I don't see a necessary distinction — one man's esoterica is another man's common stock — I regard esoteric being according to the person, not according to itself, if that makes sense? So I see the esoteric luminous 'by, through, in and with' the exoteric. Of course the esoteric dimension is discreet — interior — not every Christian could explain the significance of the rolling away of the stone and the empty tomb, but with a faith in the Resurrection, it really does not matter. Likewise, it's better to believe in the incarnation, but not understand it, than understand it, but not believe in it. That's my view, anyway.

To me exo/eso : body/soul.

The goal, as I see it, consists not in trying to form one giant amalgamation - or forced syncretism - of spiritual beliefs, teachings, schools and constitutent followers ... but, at least for students of the Ageless Wisdom tradition, in exploring whether or not a Core Wisdom Teaching has in fact existed on our planet all along.

I hope you will allow me to say, even though it will not coincide with your own viewpoint, that as a student of Christ, the Logos of God, to me He is Wisdom Itself, God's wisdom Incarnate, so I have no need to seek elsewhere than at the source. For me, God is the Core, and is always there.

Going on from that, I would say that the Wisdom of God is present, to a greater or lesser degree, in all traditions, but I do not believe that there is an ultimate or absolute deposit, a 'Core' tradition, if I might call it that, which presents a 'pure form' that can be observed apart from those traditions ... somewhere between God and religion ... I would respond by saying I hold that to be an abstraction, an intellectual hypothesis, a bit like Anselm's 'ontological argument' for the existence of God ... it can neither be proven nor disproven.

+++

Still, the gradual evolution of One World Religion is something which I am convinced is coming about already and as according to (the Divine) Plan. This, and nothing less, is what I understand by such New Testament verses as John 10:16, and the affirmation that a house, divided against itself, cannot stand (Matthew 12:25), as well as in related passages Luke 11:34 & Matthew 6:22, not to mention I Corinthians 12:12 -

If it is said there, then why look elsewhere? I mean, we have the Two Commandments — Love God and love thy neighbour ... what more do we need?

Equally all traditions open into the Absolute — Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, Brahminism, etc., they all have all that is required to do the job. I fail to see what a 'One World Religion' can offer that the others don't, but then I see the fault lies with man, not the religion.

In defending my own position, I would say that, to me, Christianity (and I am now obliged to say 'traditional' Christianity — Roman, Greek, etc.) is the most immediate and direct, an unmediated dialogue between creature and Creator.

+++

One problem that sometimes arises, unfortunately, is that some particular religious tradition, or rather - a denomination or school constituting some small subset of followers from within a greater tradition - insists that it alone holds and guards THE "Divine Revelation," AS IF there is only ONE such revelation ... or as if their own communication/communion with God means inherently more than that of some other group of followers.

Well, we have to acknowledge what has been said. Christ taught that all can be achieved in one lifetime. Others think otherwise. If people want to draw conclusions from that ... some talk of the deification of man ... some do not even treat that as a possibility, some assume that to exist is to be divine ... some religions talk of the soul, others deny it exists ...

Andrew ... I know I am moving onto very thin ice ... but p-l-e-a-s-e bear with me, in the spirit of discussion. Allow me to say that the above has been precisely my experience of Theosophy:

1 No Buddhist, no Sufi, no Daoist, no whoever, has ever said to me 'your religion is wrong' except a theosophist.

2 Followers of other traditions are not required to support their own beliefs on the grounds that my sacred texts are forgeries, corruptions, fabrications, etc...

3 Buddhists, Jews, Daoists, etc, argue their point from their perspective and their own data — every time I get involved with a Theosophist the argument is that they know more about my tradition than I do, that the orthodox Christian data is erroneous, our our understanding is erroneous. Recently both myself (Christian) and another (Jew) were informed point blank that out texts had been retro-edited to fit, and that the only true text was in the possession of Theosophy, but we're not allowed to see it ... that the Bible has been falsified to suit some power-mad agenda. Never with evidence, mark you, and often on frankly a not very well informed premise ... other than their own belief that it must be the case, because it's different to what they choose to believe.

I'm truly sorry, but in the absence of material evidence, then I am entitled to say 'I don't believe it, and see no reason to,' especially whe you're not obliged to believe it either ... Nor does secret transmissions to psychics from the astral light help, as the astral light is as creaky as man's sensibility. You know as well as I the AL is s storehouse of much, including all the febrile human imaginings in pursuit of whatever, as well as other data ... so the point is not the AL, which is not infallible, but the interpreter, who is equally not infaiilble.

I look forward to the day when TS presents itself as itself, without the apparent requirement to present itself as the only authentic version of something else.

And this has been the bone of contention between Theosophical types, and students of the Ageless Wisdom from DAY ONE ...

Point of order, Mr Speaker ... I know many students of the Ageless Wisdom who hold The American Theosophy Association as part of the problem, not the solution.

Thomas, if it's the Theosophists with whom you have so much disagreement and problem, then what do you say to the quote above? What about those darn, pesky Baha'i's, seeking after precisely the same Unity, based upon precisely the same affirmations, as the Theosophists?

Because they do not post ridiculing what Christians believe, so I do not feel obliged to defend myself or my tradition.

As far as the assertion of doctrine in Theosophy, it is not that there is no such, it is that - one is free to take it or leave it. One will not be condemned, ridiculed, excommunicated (!), or told that s/he will burn in eternal hellfire ... OR that s/he has just lost favor with God, or distanced oneself from the Divine Presence ... simply because one chooses to travel one's OWN spiritual path. You see, THIS - is precisely what Theosophy encourages!

But you have poured scorn and ridicule and your own condemnation upon me, time and time again. You have ridiculed me for claiming to be 'an esoterist' and 'a metaphysician' ... and when I defend myself, you strike an offended pose and plead for others to see how you have been abused ...

It is when, and because, the ecclesiastical authorities throughout the centuries have discouraged - even FORBIDDEN - free inquiry ... assserting their OWN presumed, and false authority, also punishing such free inquiry with the above mentioned consequences - even to the extremes of torture and death ... it is because of ALL THIS, that men such as myself choose to speak out against the false church, insisting that there is a better way.

Oh, Andrew, we were doing so well, could you not refrain from attacking my religion, even after everything you have said?

Shall I respond in kind? I would not have to look far to bring up accusations against TS, HPB, Leadbeater ... and in the past I have, but I am trying to avoid this tit-for-tat ... please do not take us there.

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

This does, and necessarily will, sound elitist ... on their great amount of learning, many years of experience ... or perhaps researching, discussing, even lecturing upon esoteric topics ... However, there is no rule anywhere which says ... this person will ... gain an epiphany into the kind of primary Truth(s) I am talking about.

I'm rather afraid it does ... I am really sorry, Andrew, but I find this very hard to read other than 'if you don't agree with me, it's because I'm far more advanced than you' ... if I did not know you better I would write this off as sheer, unadulterated, spiritual elitism.

'Look!' he cried, 'everyone's marching out of step, but me!'

And yet I know this is not you.

+++

The Ageless Wisdom, with an entirely different "theology" of the Soul - and thus a soteriology which is almost completely at odds with the Judeo-Christian - reorients the student to the more accurate (though not the "ultimately" True) state of affairs. It is my Soul which has made the sacrifice, and devoted itself, through countless incarnations, to "bearing with me" - through thick and thin - with neither judgment nor condemnation, but only genuine, abiding Love. And for this reason, it is (sometimes) known among esotericists as the Christ Principle.

See, you're doing it again! Christianity's wrong ... Judaism's wrong ... but given time, we might come to somewhere near the truth as you know it, but there's no guarantee ...

Why can you not measure your own worth without demeaning others?

And can you not see that it is because of humility itself that someone might be caused to stand up and defend the countless millions who have passed through this world, with nothing to cling on to but a faith in God who loves, and whom you dismiss so casually, and so cruelly?

If this offends, I don't mean it to ... but rather ask ... cannot you see that what you consider an offence by response is simply a reaction to the superior and dismissive manner by which you write off all those who choose to follow another path but that which is, you must agree, uniquely yours?

That your version of Truth might not be the Ultimate and Absolute?


Thomas