Identity of Masters
Jul 28, 1996 11:13 AM
Paul K. has limited his scenario's as to the fallibility of the teachings of
the Masters to three. A fourth is that the Masters were Mme Blavatsky's
Guides or Communicators.
I do not think that the enquirer into the possible identity of the so-called
Masters can do without a study of Spiritualism, channeling, multiple
personalities and all that.
One cannot ignore the fact that Mme.Blavatsky had been deeply involved in
Spiritualism. She may have renounced it for good reasons, but whether she
could control her mediumistic faculties is another matter. The Hare
Brothers, Gertrude Williams and other commentators have drawn attention to
the development of the Mahatma letters from the primitive epistels of Tuitit
Bey from the Observatory of Luxor (TRY!), who seem obviously a foreplay for
the later far more sophisticated Mahatma letters.
Anyone familiar with spirititistic communications cannot be but struck by
the familiar authority in which these "entities" always present themselves
(Seth). (In fact the inspiration of Biblical prophets by a communicator
calling himself "Jahwe" should be seen in the same light.)
Whether these manifesting personalities are part of the psyche of the medium
or represent actual discarnated spirits is difficult to say. Anyhow, they
seem often to bear resemblance to the medium.
If one studies these communications through the past 150 years one thing
becomes clear, they hardly tell anything new. They represent always the way
of thinking of their times. Striking is their moralistic and didactical
tone, the temporariness of their teachings and the fallibility of their
Or as PAUL K' states:"Find me evidence of any real spiritual Master of the
19th century who knew the truth unveiled by 20th century science.". One
could extend this to spiritistic communicators as well, who also made the
sitters believe that they were of high origin, Jesus Himself, Buddha, etc
etc. Especially remarkable is the changing identity towards figures that had
an appeal in their time. The emergence of ufonauts as communicators,
practically absent in 19th century Spiritualism, dominate the
post-WW2-channeling scene. After Einstein multi-dimensional personalities
emerged (Seth). It is remarkable that these subjects were almost ignored by
Then there is the development of the handwriting and grammar (Russian
grammatical mistakes). Admittedly many were explained by her, but rather
Apparently under influence of Mme.Blavatsky's later hostility towards
Spiritualism and the "empty shell" nature of its communicators, faithful
Theosophists have shied away from studying the history of Spiritualism with
an open mind.
>"I suspect that somewhere in Tibet some individuals are right now having a
good >laugh", wrote Paul.
There is little reason for laughter over there, but whether there is a
Master amongst them, is even more doubtful.
It seems to me naive to surmise that there are such individuals in Tibet,
unless one attaches any credence to the fantasies in Paul Baird's: Masters
I have met a number of Tibetan monks, some from the inner circle of the
Dalai Lama. I was always tempted to tell them about the Theosophic Masters
and to ask their opinion. Invariably my account was met by laughter and
amusement that Westerners could be kidded into believing that such beings
ever existed in Tibet.
ERNEST EGERTON WOOD.
Are the enquirers familiar with his disillusioned book: Is this Theosophy?
In 1936 he writes: "I learned to detest theosophical politics, with their
hiding of everything that does not redound to the credit of those in power
and their perpetual circles of mutual admiration, but I was left with a high
regard for the theosophists scattered over the world as a lovable - albeit
most innocent and childlike - body of people."
[Back to Top]
- Ernest Wood
- From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application