Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00673)

Hi Brian and all of you,

All the below is a view. It is a friendly one, I mean no harm. The readers
should feel free to comment on this:
I will try with one sentence to make my point.

1.
Someone wise said:
Love can only be got through love.

2.
Then maybe you will understand why I can't agree 100% upon your ideas in the
below, although there are some
views which derserves attention. I liked your recent quotes here at
Theos-Talk on "racism and races" - from the Secret Doctrine, and they told,
the need for a new attitude upon The Secret Doctrine.

A sentence is this:
"There can only be ONE true RELIGION".
But as someone said: "It is only when it is dark enough, that we can see the
stars." (Martin Luther King Jr.)
No Aryan misunderstandings here...or in the below...

3.
What name you prefer, is totally up to you and anyone else.
If you - your self - can't come up with any true RELIGION for me to follow -
I will stick with Theosophy in its most truest form, as what we call the
Wisdom Religion of all ages past.
But that is not what we could call - the mainstream Theosophy of today, no,
no way !
(And may be you agree on that. If so please let me know. There is a need for
a new - true Wisdom-Religion - maybe called "Theosophy", adapted to the year
2002).
I would myself like to add Martin Luther King JR. - interpreted by the
wisdom religion of all ages past. And also Idries Shah.
I know, that some might not agree. But I cull the GOOD I find in each.
What about you ?

4.
REMEMBER: In that "We cull the good we find in each" scripture and message.
(also those said to be made by Mahatmas or a Blavatsky) We learn, and we
walk the path and becomes united and is united with the undescribeable
ParaBrahman, in the sense of NOT THIS, NOT THAT,
(Neti, Neti). PERIOD.

(So be please more constructive...please).

5.
I havn't seen any book or scripture online at the website you often are
referring to - except what one could call a religion of NEGATIVE negations.
Try at least POSITIVE neagtions.
Or try some of the below.

6.
And this could help : Negativity creates neagativity. Positivity creates
positivity.

To make a refutation of your email I will refer to the following.
Heeem...But
do work trough it all the way to the end if you want to be worth your
salt, and not just be looked upon by some as a crackpot polemicist >:-):

A.
"OCCULTISM VERSUS THE OCCULT ARTS"
Article by H. P. Blavatsky (1888)
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/hpb-sio/sio-occ.htm

B.
"The Key to Theosophy"
Book by H. P. Blavatsky
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/key/key-hp.htm (Especially Section 2;
"We cull the good we find in each.")

C. *Theosophy - and Wisdom Organisations and
Their Mode of Operation *
*** Written in private by Morten Sufilight *** (2001)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization/message/28623

D. "IS THEOSOPHY A RELIGION?"
Article by H. P. Blavatsky (1888 )
http://www.blavatsky.net/blavatsky/arts/IsTheosophyAReligion.htm

That is not any kind of ordinary orthodox Buddhism, that must be clear to
every one.
a physical reading of - The Stanzas of Dyzan will never match - a clear
reading of the Akasha library on the non-physical level !
That must be true.
So don't get stock on the physical level !

7.
As stated in the article - at C. - in the above, it is always possible to
raise a opposition to other
views ( i.e. Theosophy) on a dualistic level of being - like this one on
this Planet called Earth.

But if you are against the line the organization by the name "The
Theosophical Society" has today, then I can much better understand your
emails.
But then please refer to to that organization or those organizations you
have in mind - instead of
the true Theosophy, which in truth , and by definition, is the very inner
core of your very own being, even so if you not are aware of it not !

NOT all theosophical groups are in your FIRE-line here. Well that is my
view.
Could you please be more specific on that in the future.



Feel completly free to do your best...

from
M. Sufilight




----- Original Message -----
From: "brianmuehlbach" <brianmuehlbach@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World SHOW MAHATMA LETTERS CONTAIN GENUINE TEACHINGS.


"OPINIONS about theosophy and
its teachings -- of which you, apparently, know little (even superficially)=

or nothing at all"

Brian: If you know anything at all yourself then start by showing us one
by one a scolarly refutation of the few dozen "philosophical" points
refuting the contents of for example the "Mahatma Letters" below, but
do work trough it all the way to the end if you want to be worth your
salt, and not just be looked upon by some as a crackpot polemicist:

In these Letters, the Mahatmas have made great claims about
their teaching authority. Others have accepted these Masters' claims to
teaching authority as valid, and have thus based their entire
world-view and life choices on the teachings of these Theosophical (T)
Masters.
For some this has been a life-enriching experience, which has
inspired philosophical inquiry, intellectual growth, virtue, altruism, a
sense of universal brotherhood and other good things in them. These
Theosophists have extracted things from the teachings of the T
Masters that reinforced their inherent goodness and encouraged their
intellectual growth and moral development and intellectual-affective
integration on many levels. Such a positive outcome is no-doubt what
H.B. Blavatsky and other of the Theosophical leaders had in mind at the
outset of their mission to create a global order devoted to their esoteric =

studies.

However, some of the central ideas contained in the T
Masters' "Mahatma Letters" inspired malevolent, not
benevolent people, and through the world-view and life-choices of these
ill-motivated people, led to some persistently dangerous global
ideologies and tragic outcomes in history. It is a given that the same can =

=

be said regarding some ideas contained in the Vedas, or the Bible etc.
For example, in India, the Vedic and Puranic concept of the sacramental
social body (Daiva Varnashram Dharma system) of the self-sacrificed
cosmic Purusha (Rig Veda Purusha Sukta Hymn) was corrupted by the
conscience-less powerful into the oppressive reincarnation-and-karma
doctrine related birth-caste system. As in Protestant Puritanism, a
happy privileged life was considered by the elite birth-caste Brahmins to
be the result of cosmic favor or su karma / good karma. Those
powerless persons suffering from poverty etc. were considered
unworthy of anything better by virtue of their previous sinfulness and
resultant cursed birth / vi-karma or bad karma. Thus this Vedic doctrine
of varna interpreted by non racist people of benevolent good-will could
result in a just and peaceful, progressive unifying social order. However
the same doctrine could result in oppression and birth-class slavery
when interpreted by racist persons of ill-will. In the same way the
Christian mission to go out and save people may be the inspiration for
either altruistic, benevolent and socially unifying acts that build
non-sectarian human community, or the gospel mission may be
misinterpreted as a mandate to forcibly "convert" humanity in colonial
and muslim jihadi-like campaigns.

Historical Denial Does Not Serve the Best Interest of Humanity

It does not serve the best interest of humanity to ignore the
historical relationship between the ideal of the Vedic Varnashram
Dharma system doctrine and the horrific pathological reality of the birth-
caste system. It does not help humanity to ignore the historical reality
of=

therelationship between the doctrine of Christian mission and its
perverted manifestation, the doctrine of Euro-American global
conquest. In the same way, it is not in the best interest of humanity to
ignore or totry to cover-up / obscure the historical relationship of certai=
=
n
Theosophical ideas to colonial 'white" Aryan racism, later nazi
aryosophism,and the diffusion of these ideas into various other socially
pathological, racist and scientistic movements. Ideas have history, and
even the best of ideas are misunderstood and abused or corrupted over
time and distance as they diffuse through various existing thought-
systems and languages. Time and circumstance modify ideas. Even
when an attempt is made to protect an idea from modification by
doctrinalizing it, varying perspectives allow for doctrines to be
interpreted in different ways.

Thus a non racist and a racist reading the Purusha Sukta will see
different doctrines in it. A doctrine or creed (credo=Shraddha), like
beauty can exist "in the eye of the beholder," as well as codified in
documents.

As a result, persons of good-will and those of ill-will can seem to
profess the same creed, but the content of the creed, the meaning of the
words is not the same for them. The document is the same, the
difference being in their perspective.

Syncrestic Buddhism in the Mahatma Letters...The Masters Reject the
Brahminical Scriptures of Hinduism

Letter from H.P. Blavatsky to A.P. Sinnett. This letter includes a
message from Master Morya.
Dehra Dun. Friday. 4th.

"It is useless for a member to argue `I am one of a pure
life, I am a teetotaller and an abstainer from meat and vice. All my
aspirations are for good' etc. and he, at the same time, building by his
acts and deeds an impassable barrier on the road between himself and
us. What have WE, the DISCIPLE of the true Arhats, of esoteric
Buddhism and of Sanggyas to do with the SHASTERS and Orthodox
Brahmanism? There are 100 of thousands of Fakirs, Sannyasis and
Saddhus leading the most pure lives, and yet being as they are, ON THE
PATH OF ERROR, never having had an opportunity to meet, see or even
hear of us. THEIR FOREFATHERS HAVE DRIVEN AWAY THE FOLLOWERS
OF THE ONLY TRUE PHILOSOPHY UPON EARTH AWAY FROM INDIA and
now, it is not for the latter to come to them but to them to come to us if =

=

they want us. Which of them is ready to BECOME A BUDDHIST, a Nastika
as they call us? None."

BA G: In this quote, the "Shasters" (Shastras, Holy Sanskrit
scriptures) of India are rejected, and the teachings of the T Masters and
HPB are clearly identified with Theravadin (Southern or atheistic)
Buddhism, centered in Sri Lanka, which was driven out of India during
and subsequent to the reign of the Mahayana Buddhist emperor Asoka.
Asoka's own Buddhist Master had an Ashram in Mathura, the ancient
capital and educational university "Vatican City" of Royal
Krishna-centric Vaishnavism, which the pure land tradition of Mahayana
Buddhism is closely related to. The form of Buddhism "driven away"
from India was that of Sri Lankan related Theravadin Buddhism.

The TS teachings continually merge contradictory Mahayana and
Theravadin Buddhist doctrines, especially in their combined use of
Nepalese-Tibetan with Sri Lankan sources. However, they seem to
contain no appreciation of the intimate historical relationship
between Vaishnavism and Pure Land Buddhism, as is apparent from all
the Sanskrit Buddhist texts, iconography and interdisciplinary evidence
in ancient combined Vaishnava and Pure Land Buddhist centers of
worship like Vrindavana-Mathura. Instead of correctly associating the
Mahayana doctrines, rites, iconography etc. of Nepalese-Tibetan
Buddhism with earlier theistic Krishna-centric Vaishnavism, the T S
Masters generally ignore the profoundly important Vaishnava link, and
instead focus on the "esoteric" deconstruction of other-power salvific
Buddhist transcendentalism, and watering-down of the theistic
associations with "Hinduism" to re-present N-Tibetan Buddhism as
merely a covered form of Theravada.

Of course this campaign of Theosophy reinforced the exoteric-theism-
versus-esoteric-atheism dichotomy already in N-Tibetan Buddhism.
Esoteric Voidism haunts Mahayana Buddhism in the same way that
esoteric atheism haunts "Hinduism" in the form of extreme
impersonal Advaita Vedanta, and esoteric gnosticism still haunts
Christianity in the West. Thus while claiming a love of India and her
sacred traditions,in fact, the Theosophists rejected her authentic
traditions of salvific transcendental personalism, the dominant exoteric
Bhakti traditions of Krishna-Vishnu, Shiva and Devi, to promote a form of
exoterically Hinduized but esoteric, covered syncrestic Buddhism. The T
Masters were not masters of the corpus of Sanskrit or Southern Indian
Dravidian sacred Vishnu, Shiva, Devi and Marugan etc, literatures. They
did not teach about the direct relationship between Pure Land Buddhism
and Vaishnavism, and they seemed to know little about the great
devotional, salvific traditions of either Northern or Southern India. They==


presented themselves as the highest authorities on ancient wisdom, but
apparently felt that honoring the sources of their wisdom, the
"Shasters" that they disdained, was not necessary. Thus they presented
their own system of thought, using language and teachings from various
shastras without properly representing those texts, or their source, the
Supreme Deity of the Vedas and Puranas, Upanishads, Samhitas, temple
Archana Vigraha worship, Bhakti hymnology etc.

The Eastern teachings of the T Masters are a concoction of doctrines
drawn principally from Vaishnava and Buddhist sources, and they claim
to be the "highest authority" of this "only true philosophy" on Earth.
Blofeld, in his book on Tantric Mysticism In Tibet argued that the
different schools of Buddhism are like different grades. We can see
this same general attitude among Theosophists, who also consider the
deity visualizations of Tibetan Buddhism to be like a high school level of =

=

Buddhism, while the no nama-rupa (no name-form) practice of Zen
Buddhism is considered to be like the PhD program.

Theosophy teaches that there are Planetaries (like the astrological
planet regents or devas) and ascended Masters or their equivalent of
bodhisattvas, but there is no transcendental supreme personality of
Godhead, who is the source of such beings. In Theosophy the Dharma
Kaya, or ultimate reality is totally impersonal, and personality only
exists in a qualified state in the Nirmanya (or Sambhogya) Kaya. So the
T S Masters are the highest authorities of the one true philosophy on
earth, and clearly teach a Buddhism that rejects the original
transcendentalism of the Vaishnava-related Mahayana Tri Kaya (trinity),
with its authentic bodhisattva doctrine, in favor of a Sri Lankan and Zen
related form of Theravadin Buddhism. Even so, the "absolute nothing"
(see Maseo Abe for example) of orthodox Sri Lankan- related
Theravadin Buddhism is not authentically and consistently represented
throughout the letters of the Mahatmas.

Now we have a general idea of the Masters' authority claims, the
near nil extent of their Shastric knowledge-base (they reject the
shastras) and the primarily syncretistic Buddhist Eastern aspect of their
perspective. Their writings are full of thought-forms, language and
references which clearly indicate a European higher education, so
Theosophical lore takes this into account, through reference to their
European education. Others (the Hare brothers etc.) have made textual
studies of the Mahatma Letters for internal evidence of their
authorship.

However, I am not concerned with the Masters classical Western
education in this series of comments on the Mahatma letters. I am
concerned with whether or not the Letters accurately represent the
Eastern traditions that the Masters claim to have mastered, and have
so obviously drawn from.

The Relationship Between The Masters and H.P.Blavatsky

At this point, we come to the question of the claimed relationship
between the Masters Koot Hoomi, Morya and Madame H.P. Blavatsky,
who was considered their absolutely consistent representative. What
authority is claimed for her ? Is she considered as equally
infallible as some Theosophists consider the Masters K.H. and M? In the
below, it is claimed that Madame Blavatsky was actually an incarnation
of Serapis, the Master of K.H. and M themselves!

Published by Blavatsky Archives. Online Edition copyright 2002.

"Bear Witness!" Who Was the Real H.P.B. ?
Compiled by Daniel H. Caldwell

A Mighty Adept Using the Old Body Called H.P. Blavatsky

"From the above material, it would appear that Serapis, one of
the Chiefs or Chohans of the Occult Brotherhood, was the Superior or
Teacher of both Master K.H. and Master M. Furthermore, Serapis (being
a Nirmanakaya) had taken on his "present incarnation" using
the "old body" called H.P. Blavatsky as a instrument for his "life of
self-sacrifice."
These insights help us to understand more fully the significance of
KH's words about H.P. Blavatsky:
"After nearly a century of fruitless search, our Chiefs had to
avail themselves of the only opportunity to send out a European body
upon European soil to serve as a connecting link. . . ."

BA G: Thus while HPB was playing at being the student of her Masters
K.H. and M, Theosophists teach that she was actually their Master.
The whole scheme gets quite convoluted, with the cast of T Masters
eventually being credited with human progress in general, through
their astounding litany of previous incarnations.

The Authenticity of the Theosophical Revelation

The Mahatma letters are part of the larger body of Theosophical
teachings, whose greatest early contributor was Madame HPB / her
Masters. There are many claims made about the
mystical "precipitation," automatic writing or"channeling" (modern
term) of the Masters' teachings through HPB and others. Again I
am not as concerned with these issues as I am interested in the use or
misuse and misrepresentation of authentic, redacted / corrupted or
concocted ancient Eastern source-works. Like Joseph Smith's
"miraculous" translation of his invented Egyptian "Book of Mormon"
tablets, or works claiming to be based on documents about Jesus found
in a Tibetan Lamasery, or the claimed "Essene Gospel" of the bogus
modern so-called Essenes, there is a pattern to the emergence and
presentation of esoteric and neo-gnostic spurious "ancient" source
works.

These typically are miraculously produced translations of some hidden,
lost or obscure text, inscriptions or other revelation, with built-in
deniability when it comes to authentication of the source. There is
always some reason why the original source-work cannot be produced.
Perhaps it was taken back up to heaven by an angel. Maybe it was
destroyed by Catholics, or hidden in the Vatican Library under guard.

In any event, the original document must be unavailable so that others
can not analyze it for authenticity, and compare the original
text's "miraculous translation" for accuracy. In the case of the Mahatma
letters, and the "Stanzas of Dyzan," the problem of authenticity has been
avoided by claiming that these writings were produced through the
spiritualistic mediumship of HPB.

Before her career as a Theosophical revelator of ancient Eastern
wisdom in India, she was a medium and conjuror in spiritualist
séance and medium circles in America. She was extraordinarily well read,
knew several languages, and was a great story teller and prodigious
writer who once ran a writing shop, and was expert in just the skills she
would need to take dictation from the invisible Masters. Although she
seemed to overtly hate Judaism and Christianity, she could also be an
outspoken champion for those she considered wronged or oppressed. A
complex and brilliant women, HPB commanded respect even from some
educated and powerful men, in an age when women were not expected
to be the intelligent champions of anything. It should be kept in mind
that the social evils that were later to manifest from some of her seeds
of thought, were surely not anticipated or desired by her. (I obviously
do not accept the idea that she was "Serapis," and thus an
all-knowing Master, outside of the normal influences of time.) At some
point in her conjuring and minor-league mediumship, she "got religion"
so to speak, and embarked on a life-long mission to better the condition
of humankind. She was no doubt well motivated, but produced a mixed
work that was part genius and part nonsense and trickery. The
question is ...why should people bandon the study of authentic ancient
religious and philosophical source-works to accept her / the Mahatmas'
synthesis / writings as the ultimate authority on the world's
hidden mysteries?

The Mahatma Letters.
[Caps for emphasis in quoted text mine, BA G]

"BTW-even if HPB STOLE HER IDEAS and theories from all the
ancient and modern teachers of the hidden mysteries (including Hermes,
Pythagorus, Plato, Buddha, Lao Tse, Vyasa, Patanjali, etc.) -- WHY
SEND EVERYONE TO THEM to learn new languages and dig it out for
themselves, covering the same tracks that Blavatsky did-when all
of it was so CLEARLY AND ACCURATELY synthesized in the SD (along
with other explanatory writings of HPB and associated scriptural
confirmations) in the common language that most everyone of a
thoughtful mind in the world, today, can understand?"
"In any event, I'm satisfied that the ultimate truth, as
close as we'll ever get to it (barring faith in the "revelations" of one's
favorite guru or God) is in theosophy's corner where intuition and reason
are the only Gods worth listening to."

BA G: This is the crux of the problem as far as I am concerned. It
is a matter of the basic integrity or reliability of the information that
has been presented in the Mahatma Letters, and the acknowledged
writings of H.P. Blavatsky and the other prominent personalities of the
early Theosophical Society and movement. What valuable truth did the
Theosophical Masters actually convey? Why should everyone go to the
the Masters, instead of to the still extant authentic ancient sources
of classical Eastern and Western wisdom? Did the Masters and H.P.
Blavatsky always clearly and accurately synthesize and represent
important ancient teachings and traditions in her work? Or were there
serious omissions, contradictions, and other errors? Were some of
their representations of ancient traditions seriously flawed, corrupted by =

=

extreme bias and / or even actually dishonest?

Regarding Atheism in the Mahatma Letters...

The above current Theosophist's view regarding "the only gods
worth listening to," should be compared to the statement below, of
Master Koot Hoomi himself.

"Mahatma Letter No. 10
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-10.htm

[Transcribed from a copy in Mr. Sinnett's handwriting.-Ed]

Notes by K.H. on a "preliminary Chapter" headed
"God" by Hume,
intended to preface an exposition of Occult Philosophy (abridged).

Received at Simla, 1881-? `82.

[Caps for emphasis in the quoted text below are mine, BA G]

"NEITHER our philosophy nor ourselves BELIEVE IN A God, least of
all in one whose pronoun necessitates a capital G."

... "Therefore, we DENY God both as philosophers and AS
BUDDHISTS. We know there are planetary and other spiritual lives, and
we know there is in our system NO SUCH THING AS GOD, EITHER
PERSONAL OR IMPERSONAL. Parabrahm is not a God, but absolute
immutable law, and Iswar is the effect of Avidya and Maya, ignorance
based upon the great delusion. The word "God" was invented to
designate the unknown cause of those effects which man has either
admired or dreaded without understanding them, and SINCE WE CLAIM
AND THAT WE ARE ABLE TO PROVE WHAT WE CLAIM-i.e. the
knowledge of that cause and causes we are in a position to maintain
THERE IS NO God OR Gods BEHIND THEM." ...

Confusion in the Master Results in Confusion in the Chela.

One Theosophical Society leader demonstrated why attention should be
paid to understanding Eastern thought and traditions, and individual
texts and persons, from reliable, historically authentic sources. He
profoundly erred in identifying myself (BA G) with ..."Vedantist
and Buddhist sectarian and separatist teachings"....

If he had acquired any knowledge about the subject in general from
clear and accurate, reliable sources, he never could have confused me
with a "Vedantist." If he had any understanding of the
various real-world sources and traditions involved, and had read and
understood my biographical sketch on the site where his comment was
posted, he would not have confused me with "sectarian and separatist
teachings." I am a person who has studied deeply in numerous
traditions, having a distinguished history of service in non-sectarian
interfaith activism. My own teachings are anything but "separatist." As a
Shiksha (instructing) Master, in a lineage of Vaishnavism from which
some of the Masters' / Blavatsky's teachings have been appropriated, I
have some familiarity with the Sanskrit terms they used, as found in the
real ancient source works. I also have a clear understanding of the
differences between some of the various schools of "Hindu" thought. As
a Master in a Bhakti Yoga lineage, it is laughable to hear myself referred =

=

to as a "Vedantist" in such a way.

One of my main criticisms of the Theosophical Society teachings is
that they misrepresent teachings from genuinely ancient theistic and
atheistic sources by appropriating, distorting, re-contexting and
misinterpreting them. For instance the Mahatmas' teachings sometimes
make use of ideas from Vaishnava traditions, but make no proper
reference to the theistic thought-systems from which the ideas have
been acquired.
Thus the cyclic Yuga (eon / age) rounds of a finite universe, emanations
from Godhead and Shakti, days of Brahma and such ideas are presented
without their proper context and meaning. For example, in the
authentic Vaisnava sources, the world-age Yugas are associated with
the Yuga Avataras of Hari, or Krishna-Vishnu (Amitabha-Lokesvara in
Pure Land Buddhism) who is the transcendent Deity, and the source of all
spiritual and material realms and worlds (Vyuhas and Lokas). However
the T S Masters do not properly present the relationship of the Yugas to
the transcendental Deity. While there is some emanationism in the
Masters' doctrines, it is not presented accurately from either the
Vaishnava or Vaishnava-related earliest forms of Pure Land Buddhism.
Instead, the saving Deities of other-power Pure Land Buddhism are
represented more as dependent-arising products of mind and dualism.
Outside of 'visualization', and the highest, subtlest material states, the
Deities have no transcendent personal existence in the Dharma Kaya.
However, a depth study of Northern Buddhism from India to Japan
reveals the DHARMA KAYA is HRIH / HARI, the original PERSON OF THE
GODHEAD IN VAISHNAVISM. Thus the Dharma Kaya was not originally a
state of Buddhist extinction or non-being.

But the T Masters do not represent Buddhist Voidism or Advaita
Vedantist impersonalism purely either. Their "Buddhism"
seems a strained synthesis of Vaishnava doctrines and the teachings of
several different traditions of Buddhism. They try to associate their
amalgamated Buddhist teachings with Sri Lankan Theravada, Tibetan
and Zen Buddhism, this creates a strange brew when the emanationism
of Vaishnavism (without its Divine source) is added to the mix. When
time cycles and the days of Brahma etc. are described, the origin of
Brahma (Helios Phanes) in the personality of Godhead (Narayana) is
not really stressed. In these and many other cases, the Mahatmas do
not deliver to their students a "clear and accurate" synthesis of
ancient teachings and scriptures. In fact they seem to have had an
agenda to edit-out the theistic context and content of the ideas that they
used.

Thus their product (the Mahatma Letters) appropriates elements from
both theistic and atheistic traditions and corrupts these, forming an
attempt to harmonize elements of theistic cosmogonic revelation, with
modern watered-down Neo-Vedantism and an equally corrupted form of
syncretistic Neo-Buddhism. by creating such a non-historical hodge-
podge of spuriously 'ancient' doctrines from various mis-used
sources, the Theosophical teachers render their chelas incapable of
clear, accurate, rational thought involving these matters. A basic
knowledge of real Indic traditions would have insured that the author
who called me a "vedantist" would not have accused a Vaishnava Bhakti-
Yoginof atheistic advaitan teachings by using such a loaded sectarian
term.

Because the Masters and other T S writers frequently confounded and
merged and misrepresented Indic thought and traditions, Theosophists
typically have no real grasp of the most basic truths regarding these
real-world traditions. Having accepted HPB's "Reader's
Digest"-like condensed version and synthesis of the wisdom traditions,
they have cheated themselves out of a more direct and authentic
experience of the
same.

Humility is Just Honesty About Oneself...The Pathology of Needing to
Concoct, or Following Self-Appointed or Spurious Masters

This gets to the personality development and disciplinary aspect of
the
issue. Why would someone who really wants to understand something,
choose not to go to the SOURCE and properly discipline themself in
its
understanding? Why would a person prefer to speculate about
something from the outside, rather than studying it up-close in a
scientific, disciplined manner? The problem is that certain kinds of
people cannot submit to any real-world authorities and hate to be
required to live by rules of conduct and standards of behavior. They
don't want to discipline their inquiry into any kind of
traditional approach.
They don't want to be bothered with the facts that disagree with
them,
and they don't want to learn anything that requires real
discipline
or "surrender." Such people will typically make-up their OWN
ALTER-
EGO AUTHORITIES to validate themselves and / or give themselves
credibility with others. Thus they can play at the humility and
surrender
game, without ever really submitting themselves for instruction to
anyone. As a result we see the endless proliferation of "humble
servants" and "messengers" of the invisible or
conveniently inaccessible
Masters, who never really require any surrender on "their"
disciple's
part. The "disciple' OF THE INVENTED MASTER becomes, as a
messenger of their inaccessible Master (s), the REAL GURU / Master of
others, who really do desire a real-world flesh-and-blood authority.
Thus we can observe the endless innovation and diffusion of new
esoteric and occult "spiritualities" based on the sincere surrendered
following of some people, who blindly submit to those flesh-and-blood
Masters who are themselves only the "servants" of a PROJECTED
authority-figure of THEMSELVES. So, the problem is not that HPB and
her real-world incarnate friends assembled a syncristic
thought-system from a vast number and variety of sources. The problem
is that they did not have the honesty about themselves, the humility to
admit the genealogy of their ideas. THIS IS THE BASIC PATHOLOGY OF
THE LACK OF INTEGRITY IN "SPIRITUAL BUT NOT RELIGIOUS" GROUPS.

Organized Religion is Not a Bad Thing...GSS Traditions and the
Authentic Preservation and Diffusion of Ideas

Meanwhile in the exoteric Great Religions, real-world masters require
real-world surrender, discipline (diksha) and sacrifices from their
surrendered students, but IN RETURN THEY DELIVER THE AUTHENTIC
TEACHINGS OF REALLY ANCIENT AND VENERABLE TRADITIONS. "You
get what you pay for" ....in this case either the intellectual
and devotional heritage of centuries of exoteric traditions, or the
concoctions of modern era "esoteric" cheaters. Authentic ancient
traditions still living have exoteric lineages, real examinable ancient
scriptures, real ancient histories and preserve the legitimate teachings
of their lineages doctrinally. etc. Such traditions are the real guardians =
=

of ancient scriptures and wisdom. It takes a lifetime of disciplined study =

=

to master even a tiny bit of what such traditions have to offer. But, the
proud "gnostic" or undisciplined jnani who idolizes their own
brain, will not usually be attracted to a life time of study in anything
really demanding of them. It is difficult to learn when one thinks that
they already know everything, and has an aversion to all kinds of real
authority. The proud gnostic concocter would rather be self-educated
than to actually plumb the depths of anything through real surrender
and disciplined inquiry with an authentic master requiring their respect.

This is the pathology of the Masters-channeling New Age movement. I
have seen channeling groups that are nothing other than mutual-
deification societies. Every member is in an unspoken agreement to
validate each other's fantacies of cosmic specialness.
Receiving "messages" from their Masters, or Master Beings,
the chelas reinforce their mutual fantacies of previous illustrious
incarnations, being angels, aliens, demigods and goddesses etc. Thus
they feed on each others' proud dishonesty and manipulativeness.
Usually because there really is no other authority than themselves,
surrender to these imaginary "Masters" never really requires anything of
them.

The Scholarly Contributions of Such self-Delude People

The result of such a person's scholarly endeavors usually shows
their disdain for accountability to real world history and truth, the
proper citation of previous authorities and scientific methodology. Such
personstypically want so-called "spirituality" without
"religion." They want to master science or history or some field without
being actually trained in the disciplines of that field. They tend to be
masters of everything in their own opinion, but instead they are not the
real masters of anything. They tend to be dabblers, who are venerated
as masters by gullible people with a poor fund of knowledge. Now, in
my opinion, H.P Blavatsky and her friends, were both dabblers and the
actual masters of something. Their prodigious efforts and sacrifices
did produce something. What they did master is on exhibit for all to see
in the Mahatma Letters and other primary Theosophical Society writings.
It is not that these writings have no value, but one should approach
them as what they are, and not confuse them with what they claim to be,
the highest authoritative teaching of the only true philosophy on earth.

So What Were the Theosophical Society Masters the Masters Of ?

Theosophical Society and Movement Propositions From T S Sources

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 S
Masters.

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
Gods.

My additional assertions...

9. There is an amalgamation of Mahayana and Theravadin Buddhism
with Advaita Vedantism and Vaishnava sources in the teachings of
Theosophical "Buddhism."

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 Kashmiri Eastern and Western Esoteric 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 -- ..."...

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 letter=
=
s
forcontemporary or near-contemporary plagiarized material, stylistic
elements, language or other clues to their identity. 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 translators and 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, and
the consequences 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 authenticity.

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 particula=
=
r
question. This has given me a well-rounded grasp of the main subjects
of my historical inquiries.

In Theosophical sources, 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. Thus, I begin my
commentary on the Mahatma Letters with this fact, because I will be
focusing quite a bit on the Kashmiri-like syncristic Vaishnava,
Buddhist and related content of the Letters. There is a well-established
connection between the Sikhs of Kashmir and Theosophy. What people
don't realize is that the Sikhs often worship in Vishnu temples,
because of their close historical connection to Vaishnavism. 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 AD historical beginning to
Tibetan Buddhism. The Advaita Vedantism of Sri Adi Shankaracharya
has a history too, as do 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 the religious melting-pot of 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 Kshatriya (warrior class) of the
Punjab.

Thus the Sikh 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 Vedic Vaishnava-related texts, and the Masters
refer to some 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 c AD), 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
(Ahura=Asura).

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 of
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, PURUSOTTAMA etc. To claim that a
younger tradition (Buddhism) owes nothing to its origins is ridiculous.
THIS IS THE SUI GENERIS nonsense of Theravadin Buddhism. The
extremely ancient Purusha Sukta related Forms of Lokesvara are those
of Vedic Purusha or 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 transcendent 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, litanies and prayers. 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 texts for the Tibetan Buddhist rituals of Mother Tara are given. -=

-- In theos-talk@y..., leonmaurer@a... wrote:
> I, for one, am getting tired of all your crap. What makes you think
> theosophists need you (an obscure historian with a personal hatred of
> theosophy who may be using this vendetta and these propaganda
tactics solely
> for purposes of attaining personal notoriety) to show them how
to "present
> their teachings to the world"?
>
> What hubris. It's almost sickening to what ends you will stoop to
prove your
> negative, prejudicial, and entirely unverifiable OPINIONS about
theosophy and
> its teachings -- of which you, apparently, know little (even
superficially)
> or nothing at all of its actual philosophically or scientifically
> unassailable metaphysical meanings, purposes, and ends in view.
>
> What a joke. Putting up this offer is just like your other propaganda
tricks
> -- since you know, as well as all of us convinced, or even student
> theosophists, that there is no valid "evidence" (other than first hand
> experiential reports of credible people) that can "prove" (to each of
us,
> individually) that the Mahatma letters are or are not "authentic," or
whether
> or not the Masters, or "Mahatmas" who wrote them ever existed. In
theosophy,
> we base all our judgments on what is said, rather than who said it.
So,
> whatever your so called "experts" know about Indian civilization and
their
> ancient religions, they can no more verify or deny the letters
genuineness,
> whether of its writers or their message, as they can "prove" their own
> beliefs... Other than by blabbing the same worthless and prejudicial
OPINIONS
> about them that you have. Since when do exoteric and blind religious
beliefs
> have any weight in proving or disproving anything?
>
> The truth or validity of the Masters writings and teachings, whether in
the
> Mahatma letters or in the SD, can only be judged by careful study of
their
> inherent consistency with the fundamental teachings of ancient
theosophy --
> that neither you nor your pundits can deny with any "evidence" or
even by
> logical arguments based on the same "fundamental principles" that
the SD is
> grounded on... And, which, I'll wager, all Indian philosopher/scientists =

of
> any honesty or integrity are in total agreement with.
>
> Therefore, I challenge you to come up with any "Indian" (or for that
matter
> any other nationality's) pundits who will be able to deny the teachings
of
> theosophy on unassailably valid scientific, philosophical, or religious
> grounds. Accordingly, I await your posting of their valid "proofs" or
> arguments (if any) in letters signed by them -- relating to the non
existence
> of the Masters, and/or the invalidity of the theosophical teachings.
What
> makes you think, after more than 100 years of just such "experts"
trying to
> do so, that they can do so now?
>
> Wake up! And, get off our backs with your specious and opinionated,
> nonsensical harangues and phony, self-serving offers -- which I hope
no other
> theosophists will take up. (Although, I can't speak or be responsible
for
> anyone else but myself.)
>
> As a word of caution for the "other" members of "this list"...
Theosophists
> are wise to stay out of arguments about the validity or invalidity of
> religious beliefs or metaphysics -- which is a total waste of their time =

and
> energy.
>
> LHM
> ----------------------------------
> In a message dated 11/17/02 2:43:37 AM, brianmuehlbach@y...
writes:
>
> >Let's Dallas/Daniel C. Caldwell and any other Theosophists on this list
> >present there evidence the next few hours on :
> >
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization
> >
> >It is easy for Theosophists on this list to finally show us (and the
> >world ?) that "The Mahatma Letters" truly contain genuine oriental
> >teachings or not.
> >
> >Let us just have Daniel C. Caldwell, Dallas/Dalval, Leoanmaurer, or
> >however believes "The Mahatma Letters" are what they claim they
are,
> >post there and we watch this for a day or two, or and all of us who
think
> >they have found something genuine in The Mahatma Letters post it
there
> >and see what the experts say to that. Anybody is llowed to post
there
> >. Let Daniel C. Caldwell , Dallas, and so on post whatever they want
us to
> >believe on "theos talk" on
> >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization the next day ore so.
> >With more then seven hundred (exactly 707) experts in the field of
> >ancient religions and civilisations on the Indian sub-continent.
(Including
> >Tibetologists and so on)
> >
> >And lets see how many of the more then sevenhundred experts
there
> >Daniel C. Caldwell and Dallas or however of those on theos-talk that
> >believe "The Mahatma Letters" are what they claim they are can get
any
> >of these sevenhundred and more experts there to agree.
> >Lets Dallas/ Daniel/Leon/ and so on show us they are not just
crackpot-
> >"believers."
> >
> > At least with such a large group of specialists in religions , history,=

and
> >archeology of the ancient Indian sub-continent (two or three ?) that
> >would confirm that what Dallas/Daniel and so on want us to
(bamboos
> >into ?) "believing," is true.
> >
> >I am looking now,
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization
> >
> >
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >PS I will place the complete postings as of this moment until in
three
> >days from now appear on the subject of "the content and
precipitation
> >of The Mahatma Letters" (with this very title) on my website in three
> >days, whatever appears the next three days on this subject. (except
of
> >course those posters who let me know I should not place it on my
web
> >site, otherwise the postings there are public domain, and of course I
will
> >let as soon the matter takes of on
> >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization place a message
there
> >with my intent so all there know )




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/