Theos-Talk Archives (December 2003 Message tt00025)

--- In theosophy_talks_truth@yahoogroups.com, "netemara888" 
<netemara888@y...> wrote:
The hagiographers of the world often reveal that disciples traveled 
their country and other countries looking high and low for holy men, 
sadhus, adepts, and saints. They looked for him or her who would be 
teacher, guru. The one who would take them from darkness to light. 
The one who would be the teacher bar none on the path to perfection 
as directed by God's law. Did Westerns go looking for Blavatsky in 
this light? Did they seek her out as a guru, master? How did they 
find her when they found her living in this place or the other? She 
was probably sitting around smoking in her red shirt or her favorite 
wrapper, writing. She and Olcott sitting up, late into the night, 
thinking, writing, watching. Is this the profile of a master, guru? 
She received little or no pay for her labor. Is this the profile of 
guru? The truth is that there is no ONE exoteric profile of a 
master. But there does exist an esoteric blueprint. One from which 
the masters do not detour.

The difference with Helena Blavatsky and her founders is that 
they, rather than looking for that ONE master as a goal in itself, 
finding the one master and then remaining with that master for life, 
instead went on looking for masters and sages, period. Oh, I know 
about the experience at Ramsgate in London, where she said she 
encountered her master for the first time. Was he her master? For 
that time and experience Morya was her master. Helene herself would 
be the first to admit that from Morya she learned much.

Helena herself would abide or communicate with them [how being the 
central mystery to the Theosophical Society] learn from them, and 
sometimes incorporate them into her pantheon of gods. She was 
eclectic in her sources and in her choice of masters. She did 
something very wise in fact: she learned from all those she 
encountered. 

Did she follow the basic outer convention among disciples; awaiting 
one's own true master to appear and remain satisfied with this guru 
among gurus to act as the personal teacher for life? No, not in my 
opinion, rather she assembled all the Masters encountered into the 
central clearing that was her mind, her psychic mind. Some were 
more learned and accomplished than others, but all had to be in the 
human form. Because that is also in accordance with the Law or 
dharma. One can only communicate one on one with another who is in 
the same place, and on the same plane. The reader might differ due 
to books like "Tibet and Tulku" but recall that even if the masters 
were communicating with her and others in a "psychic manner" they 
were first in the physical and not disembodied beings, despite 
gossip to the contrary.


Netemara
--- End forwarded message ---