Theos-Talk Archives (June 2000 Message tt00073)

In a message dated 06/06/00 1:33:32 AM, tlorentz@telusplanet.net writes:

>Bart,
>
>>  Well, make up your mind. Was he Jesus, 
>>or Maitreya? Jesus, if he ever
>>existed, was born 2000 years ago. The guy 
>>in the photo didn't look THAT
>>old. He looked especially good for a dead guy.
>
>The gathering was a religious gathering of 6000 Christians.  They
>recognized Him (IN THEIR HEARTS!!!) as Jesus (Christ).  They weren't
>looking at the color of His skin or whatever. They knew it in their hearts
>and were proclaiming it.  

I think that Bart makes a very good point.  If recognizing Jesus 
"in their hearts" by devout, blind believing Christians (which is what that 
"religion" has been preaching without any foundation, other than hearsay, for 
thousands of years) is any sort of "evidence" that either Jesus ever existed, 
that he will or can return "in the flesh", or that the "character who showed 
up at their meeting is anything more than a charlatan, is very poor evidence 
indeed, and does not belong in a forum of theosophists...  Who are taught to 
test every metaphysical or religious idea for themselves... The complete 
antithesis of what is preached by this and many other "organized" religions.  

There are at least two things a true theosophist cannot be... One is a 
worshipper of any God, figurehead or authority... Another, is a member of any 
religion that denies the validity or the rule of karma and the doctrine of 
reincarnation (coupled with individual, self determined choice, based on self 
devised study) as determiners of the fates or destinies of all sentient 
beings... (Thus, totally denying any sort of personal "God" or "Savior" as 
intermediary.)
>
>Later, Ben confirmed that the man, in fact, was Maitreya.  And many stories
>since and after have corresponded to this, apart from Ben.  The people in
>the crowd did not know Him as Maitreya, which is His personal name.  They
>recognized him as Christ (or Jesus).  People from other faiths have
>believed Him to be Krishna, or the Imam Mahdi or whatever is their
>representative.  They see Him as their Divine Representative.

Good for them -- if that's what they want to believe.  But even more reason 
to be suspicious of the motives of both Creme and Maitreya.  What has this 
crowd's "organized" and probably brain washed religious belief, based on pure 
emotion and mob psychology, as well as the "charisma" of the so called 
"Christ" figure who appeared before them (and fulfilled their pre conceived 
expectations) -- got to do with to do with "truth" or acceptance of such a 
belief by theosophists?  Who, are taught that such blind and irrational 
gullibility is completely wrong and dangerous, as well as the easy to use 
tools of those clever ones who seek to prey on, dominate and/or control 
masses of people for their own ends.  Even if those ends were in exact 
conformance with theosophical principles, such methods would still be wrong, 
and in violation of theosophical principles of noninterference. That is why 
the Masters have repeatedly told us that they cannot take part directly in 
human affairs. Even Jesus (if he existed as reported) -- as a Hebrew Rebbe, 
could never have imagined forming a separate, organized religion -- 
especially, around himself as its figurehead.  
>
>I note a specific air of condescension in your letters Bart.  If you're
>really not serious about it, or you feel you need to work your karma out
>on me, then I would prefer we just drop it and change the subject.

I can't speak for Bart... But, I think you should drop this subject.  For one 
reason -- that this is not a forum to discuss or proselytize any of the 
beliefs or practices of Christianity -- whose record of conformance to any of 
the objects of the theosophical movement, or to the understanding of the true 
nature of reality and the fundamental principles underlying karma and 
reincarnation, is very poor indeed.  

This insistence on promoting characters such a Creme and his belief in the 
return of the Christ, Mahdi, Maitreya, or Messiah, appears to be just another 
attempt to Christianize, Islamize, Hinduize or Hebrewize Theosophy. If you 
are a tool or mouthpiece of such untheosophical actions, you might as well 
stop talking about it on this forum, or bear the brunt of at least my counter 
arguments -- if not Bart's (whose comments, along with mine, might appear to 
you as condescension -- but certainly is not from my point of view).  

When we hear either Creme or his Maitreya side kick begin to teach 
theosophical truths to their Christian followers, and compare their words 
with the political agendas of their close associates and promoters, we can 
then judge whether or not Maitreya is a real representative or agent of the 
"Masters," a Master or Adept himself -- or a complete charlatan.  In any 
event, we can only recognize them by their fruits.  And, so far, the fruits 
of these characters are pretty meager... No better than gratuitous 
platitudes, in fact... And, highly conducive to the wary presumption by open 
minded theosophists that they may be charlatans or "fakirs" -- as many 
similar, self proclaimed "descended Masters" have most likely been before 
them, or now appearing along with them.
>
>It is sometimes difficult to contain all of the details of a story, that
>has stretched over 20 years, in the span of one or two e-mails.  There
>will, of course, appear to be inconsistencies.  It takes effort to search
>out all the details and get the full picture. It is true that this story
>*could* turn out to be a billion different "what-ifs".  If you are simply
>bent on pouring out streams of suspicion and speculation without *really*
>looking into it then what is your point?  Please save your energy.

Better, if you save your own energy.  Theosophy has been around for over a 
hundred years, and as yet, no one has found any inconsistencies in the 
original teachings.  Real theosophists can have nothing but suspicion about 
the validity of any and all appearances of so called "Masters" -- and are 
enjoined by their teachers, as well as by the nature of theosophy itself, to 
seriously question the credibility of any claimants who profess to speak for 
the Masters -- including all self proclaimed "channelers", "avatars,"  and 
"gurus," from Leadbeater, Bailey and Profit, to krishnamurti, Rajneesh and 
Mahesh Yogi, even as far out as L Ron Hubbard, and others like them -- who 
either form their own religions, or attempt to twist the followers of others 
to their own points of view for various personal reasons -- well intentioned 
or otherwise.  Even HPB tells us to question, from the point of view of 
skepticism and agnosticism, "everything" that she teaches us -- and then form 
our own convictions about what is true and what is not.  

With this in mind, let each of us go about our own individual search for 
truth and the seeking of our own Master -- "within the sanctuary of our own 
hearts and minds" -- and with resort to no vicarious atonement or guidance 
from living teachers, except from those who, being more advanced than 
ourselves along the path, can help direct us individually through its 
intricate windings, and warn us of the dangers along the practical 
"meditative" route leading to adeptship and ultimate enlightenment.

Best wishes, and "May good karma be all our desserts."   
 
LHM

-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.