Theos-Talk Archives (April 1998 Message tt00335)

Govert Schuller on the Masters

Govert Schuller wrote:

> Meanwhile I am contemplating the possibility that the Masters changed some
> of their policies. I see no reason why They could not be flexible in the
> packaging of theosophy, while maintaining the integrity of its contents.
> Situations change, messengers change, the public changes, astrological
> configurations change, cycles change etc.

Daniel Caldwell replies:

Govert, since the death of Madame Blavatsky, there have been
dozens of individuals claiming to be in contact with HPB's
Masters, . . . claiming to be new messengers from the Mahatmas &
. . . claiming to give more and newer esoteric teachings.

Do you believe that all these claims are true? That all
of these individuals have actually been in contact with
Blavatsky's Teachers? Might not fraud or delusion
be at the bottom of at least some of these claims?

Even in Blavatsky's days, she
commented on the claims of those who said they were also in
contact with her Masters. The quote is from the KEY TO
THEOSOPHY. She speaks of "bogus adepts" and "shams, swindles,
and frauds." Pretty strong language from the Old Lady. But if
what she said was true & relevant in 1889, is it not just as
true & revelant today, if not more so?

H.P. Blavatsky wrote:

" . . . Behold, only fourteen years ago, before the Theosophical
Society was founded, all the talk was of "Spirits." They
were everywhere, in everyone's mouth; and no one by any
chance even dreamt of talking about living "Adepts," "Mahatmas,"
or "Masters." One hardly heard even the name of the Rosicrucians,
while the existence of such a thing as "Occultism" was
suspected even but by very few. Now all that is changed.
We Theosophists were, unfortunately, the first to talk of
these things, to make the fact of the existence in the East of "Adepts"
and "Masters" and Occult knowledge known; and now the name
has become common property. It is on us, now, that the Karma,
the consequences of the resulting desecration of holy names
and things, has fallen. All that you now find about such matters
in current literature -- and there is not a little of it --
all is to be traced back to the impulse given in this direction
by the Theosophical Society and its Founders. Our enemies
profit to this day by our mistake. The most recent book
directed against our teachings is alleged to have been written
by an Adept of twenty years' standing. Now, it is a palpable
lie. We know the amanuensis and his inspirers (as he is
himself too ignorant to have written anything of the sort). These
"inspirers" are living persons, revengeful and unscrupulous in
proportion to their intellectual powers; and these bogus
Adepts are not one, but several. . . ."

". . . Great are the desecrations to which the
names of two of the Masters have been subjected. There
is hardly a medium who has not claimed to have seen them.
Every bogus swindling Society, for commercial purposes,
now claims to be guided and directed by "Masters," often
supposed to be far higher than ours! Many and heavy are
the sins of those who advanced these claims, prompted
either by desire for lucre, vanity, or irresponsible
mediumship. Many persons have been plundered of their
money by such societies, which offer to sell
the secrets of power, knowledge, and spiritual truth
for worthless gold. Worst of all, the sacred names of
Occultism and the holy keepers thereof have been dragged
in this filthy mire, polluted by being associated
with sordid motives and immoral practices, while
thousands of men have been held back from the path
of truth and light through the discredit and evil report
which such shams, swindles, and frauds have brought
upon the whole subject. . . ."

Again, Govert, could the following 1882 observations by the
Mahatma Koot Hoomi equally apply to many of the
persons since 1891 who have in effect said: "Eureka! We have gotten
a Revelation or Communication from the Master _________"??

Fill in the blank with the appropriate name of M., K.H., Hilarion,
Serapis,
MahaChohan, etc.

Mahatma K.H. wrote to A.P. Sinnett:

"Vainly do your modern seers and their prophetesses,
creep into every cleft and crevice without outlet
or continuity they chance to see; and still more
vainly, when once within do they lift up their voices
and loudly cry: "Eureka! We have gotten a
Revelation from the Lord!" -- for verily have they nothing of
the kind. They have disturbed but bats, less blind
than their intruders; who, feeling them flying about,
mistake them as often for angels -- as they
too, have wings! . . ."

". . . You know, S[tainton] Moses, and you know [Edward]
Maitland and Mrs. [Anna] K[ingsford] personally. And, you
have heard of and read about a good many [other] Seers, in the
past and present centuries, such as Swedenborg, Boehme,
and others. Not one among the number but thoroughly
honest, sincere, and as intelligent, as well
educated; aye, even learned. Each of them in addition
to these qualities, has or had . . . a
"Guardian" and a Revelator -- under whatever "mystery"
and "mystic name" -- whose mission it is -- or has
been to spin out to his spiritual ward -- a new system
embracing all the details of the world of Spirit. Tell me,
my friend, do you know of two that agree? And why,
since truth is one, and that putting entirely the
question of discrepancies in details aside -- we do
not find them agreeing even upon the most vital
problems -- those that have either "to be, or
not to be" -- and of which there can be no two
solutions? . . ."

Master Koot Hoomi's concluding question is very thought-provoking
and relevant to your words which I quoted at the beginning of
this email.

I certainly agree with your general statement that:

>I see no reason why They could not be flexible in the
> packaging of theosophy, while maintaining the integrity of its contents.

Yes, the packaging of Theosophy could be different but has the
"integrity of
its contents" been really maintained? Many of the socalled messengers
of
the Masters have given out teachings which are plainly contradicted in
what
is to be found in the writings of HPB and in THE MAHATMA LETTERS.

So please explain what you mean by "maintaining the integrity of its
contents." Exactly what are the "contents"? A whole series of
questions
come to mind!

I leave you with the following thought from the pen of
Madame Blavatsky:

"Time and human imagination made short work of the purity and
philosophy of these teachings [of the Buddha] . . . ."
THE SECRET DOCTRINE, I, xx-xxi

Has something similar happened to Theosophy in the last 100 years?