Re: Re Keith on Masters
Feb 21, 1995 11:53 AM
by K. Paul Johnson
According to Jerry Schueler:
> Keith: "I think the Masters in some ways are mostly embarrasing
> deadweight to theosophy as currently presented."
> This is doubtless a personal opinion. I don't agree. I see
> nothing wrong with the idea of Mahatmas or Adepts - especially
> since this is taught in both Hinduism and Buddhism. When alive
> they are called Mahatmas, Masters,
You are missing an important word, "the". It isn't Masters in
general, but "the" Masters that Keith finds problematic as I
read it. As I comment in the sequel, HPB as AN agent of SOME
Masters is historically solid. As THE agent of THE Masters,
we are seeing her in mythical terms.
What is embarrassing deadweight, in my opinion, is the occult
elitism that emerged from the view of the Masters in the early
TS. The whole idea of ladders of spiritual development with
everyone worried about which rung he/she was on.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application