WHAT WERE THEY MASTERS OF ? PART II
Nov 19, 2002 07:53 PM
by Bhakti Ananda Goswami
WHAT WERE THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY MASTERS THE MASTERS OF ?
by H H TRIDANDI SANNYASI BHAKTI ANANDA GOSWAMI MAHARAJA , SHIKSHA
(INSTRUCTING) MASTER, BRAHMA-MADHVA-GAUDIYA LINEAGE OF VAISHNAVISM
SEE PART I...
1. THE ONLY TRUE PHILOSOPHY OF THE EARTH, THEOSOPHY IDENTIFIED AS
BUDDHISM, IS FOUND IN THE MAHATMAS' LETTERS, AND THESE LETTERS ARE
THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF ESOTERIC / OCCULT OR HIGHER WISDOM FOR
THEOSOPHISTS. NEXT TO THESE LETTERS, THE "STANZAS OF DYZAN" ARE OF
CANONICAL IMPORTANCE TO THEOSOPHISTS.
2. THE THEOSOPHICAL MASTERS, AUTHORS OF THE 'MAHATMA LETTERS',
ESPECIALLY KOOT HOOMI, MASTER MORYA AND SERAPIS, ARE THE HIGHEST
AUTHORITIES WHO HAVE REVEALED THEMSELVES TO HUMANITY.
3. THE MASTER OF THE MASTERS KOOT HOOMI AND MORYA, IS SERAPIS.
4. H.P, BLAVATSKY IS THE RATHER HIDDEN INCARNATION OF SERAPIS.
5.THE BROTHERHOOD OF THEOSOPHICAL MASTERS HAS REINCARNATED THROUGHOUT
TIME, GUIDING THE WORLD ( AND EVOLUTION OF THE RACES). THUS ALL
PREVIOUS REVELATIONS, RELIGIONS AND ADVANCES IN VARIOUS FIELDS, MUST
BE INTERPRETED IN THE CONTEXT OF THEIR SUPPOSED RELATIONSHIP TO THE T
6. THE PRIESTS OF DOGMATIC OR DOCTRINAL ORGANIZED RELIGIONS HAVE
CORRUPTED THEIR SCRIPTURES, SO IT IS BETTER TO READ THE MORE
AUTHENTIC CORE OF TEACHINGS CONTAINED IN THE "STANZAS OF DYZAN" AND
THE SYNTHESIZED TEACHINGS OF THE MAHATMAS AND HPB. THERE IS NO NEED
TO LEARN LANGUAGES AND STUDY THE SOURCE WORKS THEMSELVES, AS HPB HAS
PROVIDED A CLEAR AND ACCURATE SYNTHESIS OF EVERYTHING IN THESE THAT
IS SIGNIFICANT TO STUDY.
7. SANNYASIS AND SADHUS ETC. ARE "ON THE PATH OF ERROR", AND
THEOSOPHY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SHASTRA OF BRAHMINISM.
8. KOOT HOOMI / THEOSOPHY ABSOLUTELY DENIES THE EXISTENCE OF GOD OR
9, THERE IS AN AMALGAMATION OF MAHAYANA AND THERAVADIN BUDDHISM WITH
ADVAITA VEDANTISM AND VAISHNAVA SOURCES IN THE TEACHINGS OF
10. MADAME BLAVATSKY WAS A VERY INTELLECTUALLY GIFTED AND EDUCATED
PERSON, WHO WAS THE CENTRAL FIGURE IN THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT OF
THEOSOPHY. WHETHER OR NOT SHE WROTE THE MAHATMA LETTERS WITH THE
HELP OF CORPOREAL OR INCORPOREAL BEINGS, MAY OR MAY NOT BE OF
IMPORTANCE IN CERTAIN KINDS OF ANALYSIS OF THE LETTERS. THE ACTUAL
CONTENT OF THE LETTERS CAN BE EXAMINED IN RELATIONSHIP TO REAL-WORLD
ANCIENT TEXTUAL AND LIVING TRADITIONS, TO SEE IF THE MAHATMAS'
PRESENTATIONS ARE ACCURATE WITH REGARD TO THOSE THOUGHT-SYSTEMS.
LET US NOW CONSIDER SOME OF THE CURIOUS FACTS RELATED TO THE SPECIFIC
MIXTURE OF EASTERN AND WESTERN TEACHINGS IN THE MAHATMA LETTERS.
In one letter KH writes to Sinnett:
..."Our best, most learned. and highest adepts are of the races of
the 'greasy Tibetans'; and the Penjabi Singhs -- ..."...
From: "Daniel H. Caldwell"
Date: Sat Nov 16, 2002 2:12 pm
Subject: A Question for Brian about one of his statements
Concerning Master KH, Mr. Sinnett said in THE OCCULT WORLD (first
published June 1881):
"My correspondent is known to me as the Mahatma Koot Hoomi. This is
his 'Tibetan Mystic name' - occultists, it would seem, taking new
names on initiation. . . ."
Mr. Sinnett also writes in the same work that Koot Hoomi was:
". . . a native of the Punjab who was attracted to occult studies
from his earliest boyhood. He was sent to Europe while still a youth
at the intervention of a relative - himself an occultist - to be
educated in Western knowledge, and since then has been fully
initiated in the greater knowledge of the East."
H.P. Blavatsky in 1884 wrote in LIGHT magazine:
". . . the Master [Koot Hoomi] is a Punjabi, whose family was settled
for years in Cashmere."
"There are a number of primary source documents which show that K.H.
was known as "Cashmere" ("Kashmir" or other variant spellings)
especially during the years 1875-1878 when H.P.B. and Olcott were
living in New York City."
From: "Daniel H. Caldwell"
Date: Sat Nov 16, 2002 12:03 pm
Subject: Coleman wrote: "he (K.H.) was known in America as `The
What were the Theosophical Society Masters the masters of ? Most of
the debates that I have seen regarding the T.S. Masters have focused
on the Masters' identity, the 'precipitation' of their letters, H.P.
Blavatsky's or someone else's medium-ship or 'channeling' of their
thoughts / writings, textual analysis of their letters for
contemporary or near-contemporary plagiarized material, stylistic
elements, language or other clues to their identity. In my planned
series of commentaries on the Mahatma Letters, I do not intend to
address any of these things, which have all been chewed before.
Rather than chewing-the-chewed, like a cow not done with its cud, I
want to provide a reading of the Letters from the perspective of a
person familiar with some of the source-works and traditions that the
Mahatmas used and / or claimed to be representing. Ideas and the
words, written and spoken, and images or symbols and actions that
convey them, have history. Innovations occur and get diffused.
Ideas spark social movements that wax and wane. Thought-forms, like
other 'things' have certain time-and-space limitations.
Communication is sent and received in specific forms and languages.
Each word or symbol has a content actually intended by its sender,
and any number of meanings imposed on it by receivers.
Scientifically-minded historians (not historical-fiction writers)
want to know what was actually meant by the creators or sender(s) of
a document from the past. They want to understand the successive
meanings giving to an original or earlier document by later
commentators. They want to peel-back the layers of time, and get at
the original core of an idea. Such scientifically-minded persons do
not want to impose meanings on history, they want to discover the
real meanings already there in history. They don't want to 'massage
the data' to fit into preconceived notions of history, or to support
an agenda of some kind. The real lover of truth wants to understand
what really happened, who the real players were, and what their
motives, means and actions were etc. Such investigators use
scientific methodologies and means of inquiry designed to safe-guard
the objectivity and integrity of their efforts. They try to avoid
errors by rigorously identifying their sources, to be sure of
In the case of my own studies, from the very beginning I learned of
the value of interdisciplinary research from my father (a research
electrobiophysicist), who taught me that errors could be avoided and
facts established beyond doubt by approaching a subject or question
from a multiplicity of disciplines instead of only one. Thus my
studies utilized every discipline that I could bring to bear on a
particular question. This has given me a well-rounded grasp of the
main subjects of my historical inquiries.
In the above quotes, the Master Koot Hoomi (K H) writes about the
Tibetans and Penjabi Singhs, Mr. Sinnet says that K H was a native
of the Punjab, H.P. Blavatsky says that Koot Hoomi is a Pujabi, and
both Blavatsky and others identify K H with Kashmir. I begin my
commentary on the Mahatma Letters with these references, because I
will be focusing quite a bit on the Vaishnava, Buddhist and related
content of the Letters. Tibetan Buddhism, Vaishnavism, Shaivism,
Devi worship, Sufism, Sikhism and all the branches of these
traditions have their own real world histories. For example, there
is a traditional date for the entrance of Padmasambhava into Tibet,
and thus an eighth century historical beginning to Tibetan
Buddhism. The Advaita Vedantism of Sri Adi Shankaracharya has a
history too, as does the successive waves of Ishmali and Sufi
Mohammedanism into the Punjab and Kashmir. In the Mahatma Letters
there is a curious mix of Atheistic and Theistic (Vaishnava) Advaita
Vedanta, Mahayana and Theravadin Buddhism, Sikh and Sufi
reinterpretations of Vaishnava, Shaivite and Devi teachings, and
other amalgamations which can be found ESPECIALLY in the region of
Kashmir. In Kashmir today for instance, there may be found
Vaishnava-influenced Muslim Sufi 'brahmins' who do not eat flesh,
Tantric-influenced Sahajiya Vaishnavas, various Sufi-Vaishnava or
Sufi-Vaishnava-Shaivite hybrid groups, and Sikhism, which as another
Sufi-Vaishnava-Shaivite hybrid religion is of course related to the
Vaishnava and Shaivite Kshatriyas (warrior class) of the Punjab.
Thus the name "Singh" is important in this connection.
Pure Land Buddhism, as originally in Nepal and Tibet, has its
historical origins in Vaishnavism, and so is connected to the strange
Kashmiri mix in the thread of Vaishnava doctrines and practices
running through the whole region. It is from this regional melting-
pot of Indic and Western (Sufi and Gnostic) traditions that the
Masters' K H and Morya seem to have acquired some of their unorthodox
understanding of the Sanskrit Shastras (scriptures) and to have
created their hodge-podge of an 'Eastern' thought system. Whoever
they were, they were masters of something, but what was that
something? To assess their competence as masters of eastern
traditions, one would need themself to be qualified in such
traditions. As an instructing master in the Vedic-based Tradition of
Vaishnavism, I am qualified to assess the accuracy of the what the
masters have presented from my own tradition. Since the oldest
literary traditions in the region are clearly those of the Sanskrit
Vaishnava-related texts, and the Masters refer to doctrines from
these texts, then it is reasonable to assess the Mahatmas'
presentation of ideas from these texts to determine their accuracy.
THE EXAMPLE OF THE RIG VEDA AND PROTO-MAHAYANA BUDDHISM
For example, the Rig Veda is by all estimations very much older than
the Advaita Vedantan writings of Adi Sankaracharya, the beginning of
Tibetan Buddhism (8th A D), the Era of Asoka or even the life of
Sakyamuni Buddha Himself. The Purusha Sukta Hymn is considered by
many scholars to be among the oldest surviving writings of humanity.
The Purusha Sukta is found in a collection of Vedic Sanskrit Hymns,
the Rig Veda. These hymns glorify God under a variety of Names and
Forms, as these forms have appeared from the Cosmic Body of the
universal self-sacrificed Purusha, Who is described in the Purusha
Sukta. In later corruptions of this monotheistic tradition, the
forms of Purusha, are demoted to a mere multiplicity of 'gods'. Thus
polytheism , pantheism etc. eventually obscured the originality and
supremacy of Purusha as the transcendent supreme Deity of the Rig
Veda. Purusha assumed a cosmic form for self-sacrifice to create,
sustain (as sacramental food / Prasadam) and redeem every world /
cosmic manifestation. In the Purusha Sukta, and related Vedic
texts, it is clearly understood that Purusha is VISHNU. The Purusha
Sukta is still chanted today on Vaishnava altars as the Eucharistic
PRASADAM offerings are being made. Another one of Vishnu's Vedic
names is Asura (from the root meaning 'being', 'to be, exist'). In
the "Dawn and Twilight of Zoroastrianism", R. C. Zaehner identifies
the cosmic Purusha with the Zoroastrian supreme Deity Ahura Mazda
The Jagganatha or Universal Form of Vishnu as Purusha is sometimes
called his Vishva Rupa or Virata Rupa. This is one of the
theophanies of SRI KRISHNA that was revealed to Arjuna in the
Bhagavad-gita, The cosmic form of God in Jewish mysticism is
definitely related to the revelation of Sri Krishna in the Gita.
The universal Purusha is of course identified with the Purusha
AVATARA FORMS OF VISHNU. In the Vedas, Vishnu is called by many
names, including Asura and Purusha. It is Vishnu Who is worshiped in
multi-form in the Vedic hymns. This is the tradition of the oldest
stratum of Vedic so-called 'Hinduism', and all the principle Vedic
Nama-Rupa name-forms of Vishnu are found many centuries later in
Mahayana Buddhism, including Tibetan and related Nepalese Buddhism.
There the very ancient Vedic names and forms of Vishnu-Purusha AS
LOKSHEVARA, are connected to Vaishnava doctrines, rites, practices,
sacramental social order etc.. So the foundation of Tibetan
Buddhism is in the much earlier worship of Vishnu-Purusha, without
any doubt. When the entire socio-religious cultural milieu in which
Sakyamuni's Buddhism first developed was Vedic-Vaishnava, how is it
reasonable to assume that the pervasive elements of Vaishnavism in
Mahayana Buddhism are later, intrusions or corruptions ? In fact,
Mahayana Buddhism, including Tibetan Buddhism, uses the very Sanskrit
Names of Krishna-Vishnu for the ADI BUDDHA, who is also called ADI
PURUSHA, BHAGAVAN, PURUSOTAMMA etc. To claim that a younger
tradition (Buddhism) owes nothing to its origins is ridiculous. The
extremely ancient Purusha Sukta related Forms of Lokesvara are those
of Vishnu. The same names and forms are there in both the Buddhist
and Vaishnava traditions, and this is not peculiar to the Nepalese-
Tibetan form of Buddhism either. Everywhere in Pure Land Mahayana
Buddhism it is the same. The names, forms, doctrines, rites etc, of
the salvific other-power tradition of Buddhism are closely related to
those of Krishna-centric Vaishnavism. When we look at the Sanskrit
sources for the Mahatmas' 'Hindu' and 'Buddhist' ideas, again the
oldest of these are the Vaishnava and Vaishnava-related scriptures.
For those accustomed to thinking of Sanskrit literatures in terms of
some generic 'Hinduism', no such thing existed in the ancient world.
Scriptures were the testimony of specific traditions, such as the
sattvic Vaishnava or Shaivite or tantric Devi worshiping
traditions. In the "CULT OF TARA" by S. Beyer, the original
Sanskrit for the Tibetan Buddhist rituals of Mother Tara is given.
Any Vaishnava pujari priest would immediately recognize these
Sanskrit mantrams, hymns and rites ! So, if we are going to
seriously consider the claims of the Mahatmas to mastery in Tibetan
Buddhism, I want to see evidence in their Letters that they knew of,
and understood the close relationship between Tibetan Buddhism, and
my own much more ancient Vedic tradition of Vaishnavism.
END PART 2
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application