Re: ~~(^.^)~~
The Masters follow Budhism- Wisdom. Of course all the Mahatmas respect Lord Buddha.
The original inspirer of the theosophical movement was Master C. R. HPB did move away from this influence.
According to Steiner the two main Eastern Masters are Kut Hoomi and Morya. The Western Masters are Christian Rosencreutz/Saint Germaine and Master Jesus/Zarathustra.
Kind Regards,
Br.Bruce
Br Bruce, Nick,
et al,
Just for clarification, although there are
many Masters discussed in the esoteric teachings, from HPB's day onward - in terms of modern Theosophy, yet also mentioned in
every religious tradition - both East & West, it is fairly commonly accepted by Theosophists, certainly by students of Alice Bailey, Helena Roerich, Lucille Cedercrans,
et al that
all of these Masters belong to, and represent,
One Occult Brotherhood - the Spiritual Government of our planet.
And this
Brotherhood has been referred to since Alice Bailey's day onward, by a large group of esotericists, as
the Hierarchy. More often, nowadays, I have heard another expression used, since
`Brotherhood' isn't politically correct, and since `
Hierarchy' sometimes fails to convey the original significance of the Eastern term
Mahatma, or Master. The term I prefer, whether referring to an individual Master
or the collective body of Earth's Spiritual Hierarchy ... is
`Great Ones.'
My own inclination, in considering the Foundational Nature of HPB's Treatise,
the SD, is to say,
yes, Theosophy can be considered something of a religion (notwithstanding my earlier post on this thread) ... since there
is a unique, Inspired spiritual
text -
Divinely originated. The Theosophist who has not considered the Masters as,
literally, a
Divine Source ... may do well to ask himself,
And why not? Is not the very
Heart of God Divine?
For that is what
the Great Ones are, as we recognize the great Energy Center,
the Heart, which They form in the body Logoic ... Humanity being the creative,
throat center of the planet, and Shamballa equating with
the Crown, or highest Head center. Other correspondences, of course, exist.
Now the Christian will hear none of this, because he does not accept, or feel that it is worth understanding, that GOD INCARNATES. Therefore, we are - beyond a certain point - speaking as to a
wall, or to a thick, heavy
brick. Once the
mind has made itself up as to
who, where and WHAT God `is' ... there will be
no convincing the
owner of that mind - for in fact,
no real conversation is taking place, when we say things like,
"God Loves us."
For the one person, this refers to a
relationship - not a conditional one, and not something that we can
bargain our way into. It means that it
already exists, and that in fact,
it always has - since the `Lamb that was slain from the Foundation of the world.' The other man, failing to consider the
obvious implications of that most
simple and telling (yet veiled) Occult phrase, seems to find it necessary to invent
a second Divine sacrifice, as this is much, much easier than recognizing God's ORIGINAL one, God's
continual one - and thus,
our requirement of capitulation.
Enter the most blasphemous idea of all, to accompany VICARIOUS ATONEMENT ... the SALE OF INDULGENCES. 
So we are dealing with FUNDAMENTAL differences, as we speak of something like
the Masters. I can deny that there are
fish, or fruit, or even the Father, yet all of these - and more - exists. Either I will make room for them in my
philosophy, and my
understanding, or I will suffer for it ... and my grasp of things will be
not just incomplete, it will be skewed.
And of course, it may thus
NEVER become apparent, to some, that
Jesus was an Initiate, just like Paul, after him. Paul, as we know, went through a great
Conversion experience, analogous individually to the
Tranfiguration, because
IDENTICAL Spiritually ... opening the door to the Initiation that follows. And that Initiation
awaits us all.
The Christ DOES descend, if we are considering Christ as a Cosmic, and also a Solar, even a
Planetary Presence. Yet that
Presence was not "born in Bethlehem, raised in Judea, crucified at Calvary and
resurrected for the salvation of the faithful and the elect." These, as every Theosophist, Anthroposophist, esotericist knows -
are the myths of the Church.
Sadly, they are the
lost, buried myths, now little more than a
story - though always a
cause for hope, and still capable of providing a DOORway (the Gateway we know so well), for
him who knocks, and who LOWERS HIS HEAD in order to enter. But that DOES mean the consideration of
Truths and Teachings which may as yet be unfamiliar to us, for only a fool would imagine that God has provided
all of His Wisdom and of Divine Understanding to you and I. We may have it
available to us, yet it us
up to US to accept what is offered, to
apply it in our daily life, and find that
additional doors begin to open up, all around us, as we travel the
Via Dolorosa.
Were there no self-sacrifice necessary,
THEN the billions of Christians upon the planet, and those of
every faith & spiritual orientation,
COULD SAY, "I am saved." But Theosophy has
always taught of the PATH, and HPB only reminded us, today, of what that Path consists,
in a presentation which was barely capable of reaching even the MOST elect of her own day. No wonder even 140 years later her Sacred Revelations
are fools' fodder, for foolish, futile fighting.
I believe that Theosophy
does, or
can, constitute
a religion,
specifically in its presentation through HPB's Teachings onward, though also existing in other forms, such as
Anthroposophy, the Teaching of Living Ethics (Agni Yoga), the `Blue Books' (Alice Bailey's writings via Master DK), `The Wisdom' (Master R's Teachings via Lucille Cedercrans), et al.
For the reasons that Neemai has cited, and given the
Core Tenets as shown from HPB's day onward, anyone who embraces
most or all of these principles could be said to be
`a Theosophist' inasmuch as that person seeks to embody the Virtues of
the Wisdom Religion, following that
same great Path to Salvation as trodden by
the Buddhas, the Christs, the Great Ones before us. This, then, becomes
our RELIGION.
Nick, you and I are in general agreement,
that there is a Bodhisattva, or a World Teacher, although you may prefer to state that the World Teacher is
not the same as
the Christ. While technically I disagree, I would say this:
Nick, I feel that the `Christ of Churchianity' has little to do with
Christ as the Bodhisattva, the World Teacher ... and I simply believe that the gradual, increasingly familiarity (in the minds of esoteric students both Western and Eastern) of the idea that
Christ and the Bodhisattva are One, has been an intended teaching of
The Great Ones all along.
If we ask,
why didn't HPB then present this idea, especially if she (presumably) MET and even spoke DIRECTLY with the Christ - in the etheric, if not in the flesh, as it were - we open ourselves to some friendly, open-ended speculation. My own guess would be that, quite simply,
the Lords of Liberation had not yet done
Their Great Work of breaking up the existing
forms. HPB, as we can clearly see, often embodied, or gave expression to
a measure of that awesome energy, yet I would politely suggest that SHE DID NOT choose,
either idly or flippantly, to critique the Roman Catholic Church (and Churchianity, as AAB later called it) ... any more so than she
sought to see the utter failing of modern, even
materialistic, science.
What she
knew, because she
DID hear it from the source, as it were, was quite a bit about
the Plan (on higher levels), as well the more immediate
Plans, of the Masters. She even had awareness and insights, some of it
shown to her, regarding Humanity's next several decades, even centuries, of
both spiritual and material evolution. She also had a clear enough understanding of the ultimate goals and path of progress for occult evolution upon our planet - in both this and future rounds,
perhaps including much that is normally reserved for Higher Initiates (though obviously she did not have
complete Initiatory awareness).
Getting back to
the Christ, I believe, as plain and simiply as I can put it, that for the
late 19th Century, she did
everything in her power - and in accordance with
the Will and the Instruction of the Great Ones (both her own, immediate Teachers, and also Those Who occasionally dictated or visited and assisted her) ... to further the Will, the Work, the
Purpose,
of the Christ - and therefore, had the information and various relationships that
AAB gave out been possible, and/or helpful,
it would have been done.
Frankly, I do not see how we can even
begin to consider, contemplate,
and TRUST (in) an Occult Hierarchy, yet imagine that
such a Worker as HPB - who gave out what she did, as she did,
sacrificing so much - could have
failed in so important a task as saying,
Oh, btw, Christ IS the Bodhisattva.
Yet we find CWL saying this
at some point, and he might be thought of as
a bridge, or providing a bridging understanding of how the Eastern and Western traditions are esoterically related ... both in terms of the past, as well as present and future.
The giften clairvoyant Geoffrey Hodson also contributed to the
understanding of this matter, showing us that the
great Angels and Archangels provide
Inspiration, uplilftment and Inner Growth for the consciousness of the participants of
every religious tradition ... be that
Hinduism,
Christianity,
Islam, etc.
Alice Bailey certainly shows to what great extent the
Buddha and
the Christ are related, as Spiritual
Brothers - and this, in an even deeper context than the customary,
Brotherly relationship supposed to exist between
all Masters, and amongst Their Highest Initiates ... as also being desirable of prevailing between
ALL MEN (people) upon the planet.
But Jinarajadasa published a book about
Christ and Buddha, which I now hold in my hand, as early as
1908. This was
certainly well before Master DK's work with Alice Bailey, thus we can consider that
somehow, for whatever reason, the Great Ones DID want us to know about the
Hierarchy, and about its
Rulership, and about the fact that
ALL the Great Ones labour TOGETHER ... from at least this, early date ... though we will also see HPB speak
plainly enough about
The Brotherhood, even if
she - it turns out - was primarily the Emissary of the
TRANS-HIMALYAN Branch.
Again, I will say that
metaphysically, soteriologically, we might talk about
WHO AND WHAT IS `THE' Christ ... yet I think that Bruce, Nick and myself will be able to come to some measure of agreement that
the Cosmic Christ - to whatever degree this PRESENCE has entered into our Solar System, and also our Planetary System - is NOT THE SAME as
the Initiate, Jesus.
The Christian view
might be, for some, that
Christ became Jesus, but Thomas,
this is not how the Wisdom Religion teaches it. This, from times predating
Christianity by
millions of years, though also
FOLLOWING Christianity - and going forth
at the direct Instruction of precisely this same CHRIST. For, whatever we may wish to
call Him, esotericists still know Him - as we ALWAYS have -
as `the HEAD of Earth's Spiritual Government,' even if between our various Schools there are differences of terminology, just as there is (such variation) between exoteric religions, in identifying this same Individual Presence upon our planet.
Christ exists -
as a Principle - within
each one of us, and I'll bet Nick and Br. Bruce and I can all narrow this down to
one or two words, expressing this CENTRAL concept and Teaching, a most
Fundamental one to all modern esoteric presentations.
Exoteric religion itself tends to acknowledge it also, with varying degrees of clarity and insight.
My own preference is the term that has been adopted and popularized since
Alice Bailey's teachings forward, and that is
`Soul.' Another, equally helpful term that I am comfortable with, is
`Human Goodness.' Either one must be understood as something INNATE, because
God-Given,
i.e. shared with or provided to each and every one of us ... and NOT dependent upon
voiced affirmations, professed allegiances or articles of faith, much less other superficial characteristics - for its existence within us.
While Theosophy and Anthroposophy
may or may not require students to express a
firm belief in, and devotion to this Principle, my own opinion and finding is that
anyone who `sticks with it' can't help but develop a growing recognition, and soon find(s) that
this really is - what it's all about ... and by this point, we are much, much less concerned with questions like,
Is or isn't my path a `religion' - we are more focused on how best to
Lovingly, Intelligently (Wisely) Serve.
That said, I think discussions are
in & of themselves a form of Service, especially those in which
clarification can be given - in order to combat various extreme distortions, all-too-often INTENTIONALLY furthered for one's personal agendas. And the latter, coming into contact with the
views of one's INSTITUTION, might even include -
for a mere thirty pieces of silver - the very betrayal of one's
Messiah ... however unwittingly and unknowlingly we may later realize our actions have been.
Just let's not go about HANGING ourselves!
Namaskara
