"CHANGELESS SERVICE
...There are other cycles within this archetype for service. The one we would consider here is the "Hundred Year Cycle" of the Theosophical Movement. It is linked to a decision made in the 14th century, when, under the auspices of Tsong Kha Pa, whom H.P.B. stated was a "reincarnation" of Gautama the Buddha, the great Lodge of Adepts vowed to take advantage of this hundred year cycle to bring additional facts before the "Western Races" of mankind; races, which earlier, had severed themselves from the truths of ancient wisdom. This service was begun and a duty initiated to bring to their brothers in the "West" an increased perception of the Higher Self, of the Divinity that is enshrined in each man-mind. ... The Adept, known to us as H.P. Blavatsky, spearheaded the fifth mission of this nature in the West..."

The above quote is from the November 1997 THEOSOPHY magazine. Over the years I have seen similar passages from ULT & other Theosophical groups. It is not clear to me that HPB's mission was only the fifth mission to the West. Does this mean that before Je Tsongkhapa's time, ca. 1400, the West received no Messengers from the Occult Brotherhood or even the Tibetan branch of it?

In HPB's article "The Cycle Moveth" (Collected Writings 12, 120) she wrote: "...messengers [are] sent out westward periodically in the last quarter of every century -- ever since the mysteries, which alone had the key to the secrets of nature, had been crushed out of existence in Europe by heathen and Christian conquerors..."

The European Mysteries were "crushed out of existence" -- long before 1400.

In CW 14, 294-95; in HPB's article "The Last of the Mysteries in Europe" she said:

"The first strokes if its [the Mysteries'] last hour sounded in the year 47 B.C. ... It was during the first century before our era, that the last and supreme hour of the Mysteries had struck." First Alesia and then Bibractis in Gaul were "plundered and razed." Bibractis "was the last city in Gaul wherein died for Europe the secrets of the Initiations of the Great Mysteries..." She also mentioned that the beginning of the end of the European Mysteries began with the conquests of Alexander the Great around 320 B.C.

So Messengers to the West have been sent from the Lodge since at least the beginning of the Christian era -- some 2000 years -- perhaps longer.

Perhaps our Western egotism has once again blinded us to the reason for this recurrent grace from the Masters. It was not because the Adepts saw us as so spiritually advanced as to have earned this assistance, nor because They were taking advantage of a cycle, but because we had blindly destroyed our own original sources of truth and inspiration. We in the West were, and are, being helped primarily because of the vast Compassion of the Eastern Brothers, not because we deserve it.

I would be curious to hear of any other messengers, if they can be found.

However, I do remember reading in the literature that Blavatsky's work was the first such wide-spread & public release of the teachings. (Up to then, the releases had been of much smaller portions of the Divine Wisdom, in much more controlled releases.) I believe the idea was that the world was finally ready for such a large and un-encumbered release. (The literature also says that much more has yet to be released.)

Each previous release had been in the form of creating an organized religion. The amazing thing about Blavatsky's work was that she did not create a religion in order to release the teachings, no doubt a first in the history of mankind. Religions always turn into works of exclusivity, and Blavatsky was able to avoid that, something we all are grateful for.

Please share any info on any other messengers that you can find.

If you search the ULT sites I think they have articles with candidates they think were Messengers. Cagliostro, for example, was supposedly the one before HPB.

My searching has turned up nothing so far. I have found is this "bogus" list. (I do not mean to say that they are indeed bogus, just that they have been identified as such.)

http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/contradic...rmessengers.htm

Here is something on Count de Saint-Germain:

http://www.theosophical.ca/SaintGermain.htm

These Great Theosophists & Precursors of HPB series are what I was thinking of. I have not read all the articles, but I suspect there are Messengers mentioned or implied in them.

http://www.wisdomworld.org/setting.html

This ties in with a question I have wanted to ask: Who or what is the hierarchy of "masters" ( ~ messengers) that Share International talk about? I mean are they historical persons or spiritual beings or ....

What is the occult brotherhood (of messengers) you mentioned here?

But one thing I don't wholly agree with here is the "west" being taught by the east but not vice-versa also/instead.

Yes surely there were contacts between w & e before 1400, I can't remember exactly but isn't Plato and one of the eastern masters very similar?

Re occult history: http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/Article/The..._to_Hidden.html

(also related http://watch.pair.com/new-government.html)

Cagliostro was a strange figure some good sources I've seen on him are AN Field, LD Gadd and Andre Nataf.

Ro-fhessa,

You asked,

"Who or what is the hierarchy of "masters"...?"

--> The Masters are the ones who have released the information called the Ageless Wisdom, which is what Thesosophy is based on. Here is a thorough explanation:

http://www3.igalaxy.net/~nick/theosophy/lessons20.htm

"... are they historical persons or spiritual beings...?"

--> They are both. They are Nirmanakaya, which means they have qualified for Nirvana, but they choose to continue incarnating for the benefit of mankind. They are "spiritual" in the sense that they have no bad karma to burn off, and they are capapable of Nirvanic consciousness.

"What is the occult brotherhood (of messengers) you mentioned here?"

--> Here is a chart of the entire Hierarchy. The Brotherhood is all of the levels at and above Level Five, Masters of the Wisdom.

http://www3.igalaxy.net/~nick/theosophy/pantheon.htm#adept

Here is a chapter in a book on the Brotherhood of Masters. In this book, they are referred to as the Great White Brotherhood:

http://www3.igalaxy.net/~nick/theosophy/il-001.htm

In this chapter of a different book, they are referred to as the Inner Government of the World:

http://www3.igalaxy.net/~nick/theosophy/fp-322.htm

"But one thing I don't wholly agree with here is the "west" being taught by the east but not vice-versa also/instead."

--> The Ancient Wisdom has been released at regular intervals (to certain trusted people) since the beginning of humanity. These latest releases are only the latest in a string of releases. (Theosophy is unique because it is the first public and unrestricted release of a large amount of the Ancient Wisdom in the history of mankind.)

Regarding East vs. West, as it just so happens, the East has a better grasp of the Ancient Wisdom than the West does, so the flow has been mostly a one-way thing. However, the Ancient Wisdom does exist in the West. For example, the Jewish Kaballah contains several ideas that can be traced to the Ancient Wisdom. It is the amazing similarities between, for example, Judiasm and Hinduism, that point to the idea that they both come from a common source.

"... isn't Plato and one of the eastern masters very similar?"

--> Plato has been identified as a member of the Great White Brotherhood.

Thanks for all of that, it seems coincidentally somewhat like the conclusions I have been coming to myself as it has been.
I think I see where I got confused about the heirarchy of masters 1) I was thinking linearly so Jesus Christ and Maitreya/Kalkin/Mahdi/etc was one same (reincarnation) line, and 2) overlooked the reincarnation side of it, but this was because they said (paraphrase) "this time THE master will come himself rather than his messengers (JC & other previous/later ones)".

Ro-fhessa,

Some people say that Jesus never existed, but I prefer the story that Jesus was a reincarnation of Maitreya.

Regarding THE master who will come, I think of it in terms of the teachings of the Brotherhood. Theosophy teaches that there are always two Buddhas working for humanity at any time, one called the Manu and the other called the World Teacher. From time to time, those two Buddhas move on to higher work, and two new Buddhas are appointed to take their places. Gautama was the last World Teacher, Maitreya will be the next, and Kuthumi (one of the two originators of the Theosophical Society) will be the World Teacher after Maitreya. A Buddha-to-be is called a Bodhisattva, which is what Maitreya is.

I do not see it as one main teacher who periodically re-appears ala Jesus. A hierarchy of teachers (the Brotherhood of Theosophy) makes more sense to me.

The Share "Masters", like others presented by CW Leadbeater, the "I am" movement, Jinarajadasa & Alice Bailey are not real, but delusions.

Hi all,

I think this whole issue is confused. I have not seen any lists of previous messengers 'from the east' that fit with the 'last quarter of the century' idea. In other words: I think Blavatsky put up blinds on this one.

The difficulty with the gap between the western mysteries and Tsong Ka Pa was new to me, but not surprising.

Curiously enough, finding the messenger of the 20th century is not problematic because there is a lack of candidates, but because there are too many! [Ken Wilber, countless Tibetan Buddhist masters, quite a few New Age gurus]

The Share masters are least convincing of all. I have yet to hear one word from that group that is even close to being spiritual food - other than 'let's be kind to oneanother' (not that there is anything wrong with that, but it's a bit obvious).

Sounds to me like a fool, or a crook. {sorry, hope I did not offend anyone, but I can't see that there is anything serious about Benjamin Creme}

I don't think this is a theosophical paradox that we'll be solving here.

Katinka

[added] Oh, and here's some quotes and articles on what Blavatsky and the Mahatmas wrote on what mahatmas are: Mahatmas, adepts and masters [/added]

I'd like to add that every spiritual teacher is seen by their followers as unique. Mohammed is seen as unique, the first of a kind (and the last). Jesus is seen as unique (only to be followed by His return at the end of time) etc.

Blavatsky put things in a way that answered the questions of her time: and those questions were largely scientific, so she tried to answer that. At this time we still have those type of questions, but people are also starting to wake up to the results of modernity on their personal lives and ethics. The emptiness of atheistic/agnosticism is being felt and people want direction in their lives - more practical (as opposed to theosophical-theoretical) needs are felt - and Tibetan Buddhism (amongst many other things) fills that void. I'm sure Tibetan Buddhists feel their path is unique as well... We are all unique...

As I take up my interest in theosophy I am becoming somewhat bemused by the list of various 'contacts' and wonder what the stance is of Theosophical societies towards messages such as the one below?

http://www.sanctusgermanus.net/current%20m...0in%20Force.htm

Paul,

The thing about these "contacts" is that they may or may not be genuine. Who can tell? I suppose the only way to decide is to look at what is said, and see if it is relevant.

We are mistaken if we think Blavatsky was the only person communicating with the Masters, and that such communications will never happen again. As a matter of fact, it was written somewhere that the Masters make a special effort to send messages at the end of each century. The trick is to distinguish the genuine from the fraudulent.

I am reminded of how HPB herself admonished us not to attend seances. The problem is, at a seance, if you want to talk to dearly departed Uncle Joe, you do not know if you are really talking to Uncle Joe, or only talking with some passing astral entity posing as Uncle Joe. Also, HPB warned us that, after death, only the top three aspects of a person enter Devachan, and the bottom four aspects remain on Earth, floating around. It is these imposter-shells that often communicate with us during a seance.

We must take the same attitude towards the present-day channelers of Master M. Whether it is truly him, or just an imposter, we do not know. All we can do is read what is given, and see if it rings with truth.

One does not need to be a member or official of any major theosophical group to see that "el morya" is pure flapdoodle.

Perhaps Paul, if you have not already read my old article, Theosophy's Shadow, you will. It gives some keynotes to distinguish between pseudo-theosophy and the real thing. http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/baileyal.htm

"el morya" began to be used, I think, by the "I am" channellers back in the 1930s or so.

The precise hierarchy isn't that important anyhow (for us). Since the masters reportedly also influence people that they think are doing important work - all we need to do is search for truth and live a theosophical life - and do whatever important work we think we need to do.

The only way to decide which teachings might be related to the hierarchy we are discussing here is to see whether their teachings make sense. It is no accident that this criterium is also the main criterium any rational person would use to find out what is true, anyhow.

Thanks for the response chaps.
Yes, there are plenty of claiments out there

http://www.markfoster.net/jccc/ascendedmasters.htm
It's almost comical!
Kh7 wrote,
"The only way to decide which teachings might be related to the hierarchy we are discussing here is to see whether their teachings make sense. It is no accident that this criterium is also the main criterium any rational person would use to find out what is true, anyhow."
I suppose you are right. One should know if something is true or not intuitively. I think its important howevert for a person considering becoming a theosophist to look at the origins of the teachings and see how cogent the sources are. Here is the result of some web based literature I found.

Nicholas wrote,
"One does not need to be a member or official of any major theosophical group to see that "el morya" is pure flapdoodle.

Perhaps Paul, if you have not already read my old article, Theosophy's Shadow, you will. It gives some keynotes to distinguish between pseudo-theosophy and the real thing. http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/baileyal.htm

"el morya" began to be used, I think, by the "I am" channellers back in the 1930s or so. "I read bits of Baily's A Treatise on White Magic years ago and found it very dull. Thankyou for this link Nicholas as it was educational. I have noticed that Theosophy has been thrown in with the Lucis Trust as part of what are known as the NWO/alien/anti-christ theories dotted about the place these days, for example,

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NewAge/Alice_Bailey.htm
http://www.geocities.com/newworldorder_the...rs_of_Zion.html
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_sociopol_nwo.htm
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=41806
I think your paper on the differences between HPB and Baily, would help put many of these theories to bed.
Also you question Leadbeater's authenticity, "This assertion is false. Her books are rooted in the pseudo-theosophy pioneered by CW Leadbeater. For example, one of CWL's favorite revelations was the return to earth of "Maitreya" the Christ. Bailey accepted this fantasy. " I have read a few scarey stories about him and it seems he may be either an occult genius or a deviant fraud (or both). I came across this article on his experiments with so called occult chemistry
http://www.chem.yale.edu/~chem125/125/hist...ccultAtoms.html. Speaking of frauds, my old Indian religious philosophy tutor from university a while back said in a seminar one day that blavatsky was a fraud. I dont believe him. I think all the other contacts are dubious, especially the ones in the US constituting the I Am schools (Interestingly Elizabeth Claire Prophet now has Alzheimers and has stopped contact).
Apart from a few in the TS then I would have to draw the line there. I feel it is important not to rush blindly into anything but to look into what it is you may be about to join. Once I have these issues cleared up I can concentrate on the teachings which i know very very little about and perhaps should be spending more time on that!
Thanks again for your thoughts,
Paul.



--------------------

Hi everybody!

I, too, have noticed a great deal of anti-Blavatsky sentiment on the internet. She is certainly bantered about on some places on the internet as a total scoundrel. She was unflinching in her condemnation of Christian leaders, and they have really gone after her in response, repeatedly calumnizing her.

As for the channelers of El Morya, I agree with everyone else here is saying. I believe "the proof is in the pudding." When I read the Morya channeling posts, they just don't seem to say anything.

Katinka said,

"... all we need to do is search for truth and live a theosophical life...."

--> This is so true. One of the things I like most about Theosophy is that everyone is challenged to think for themselves. Nothing is "taken on faith." Nothing. Developing critical thinking is an important thing that modern men and women must develop, and Theosophy does this better than any other belief system that I have found.

Hi all,

Actually Govert Schueler has a learned and nuanced look at the messengers historically online at: Centennial Efforts and Counter-Efforts of the Millennium

This is the first attempt I've seen that succeeds at a reasonable reconstruction of the effort in the last 25 years of every century. He can do that, because he seperates the small seed that gets planted each century around '75, from the sometimes much larger effects that are more easily noticed, but don't conform with the last 25 years of the century pattern. He also tracks the efforts to counter the beneficial impulses!

Very impressive.
Katinka Hesselink

Katinka,

That looks interesting. I'll sit down and read it when I get some free time. (The California Theosophical Conference starts in a couple of days.)

Spent some time at the Alpheus site. Looks like GS is a devotee of the Ballard, Clare Prophet "I am" lineage.

So however appealing his esoteric history looks to some, it looks untrue to me. Take a gander at his 9-11 explanations etcetera.

I know Govert reasonably well, and it would be unwise to dismiss him this quickly. He does sound research and even had a paper on Krishnamurti published by the Theosophical History Centre - which makes him a member of a very select group of theosophical historians. He has a degree in philosophy as well.

Since when does someone's 'occult background' mean that everything they write is nonsense? That's the sort of superficial dismissal that has gotten theos-talk in it's present state of silence after the storm...

I'm not personally involved with the I Am movement, and in general feel that their work is rather superficial. On the other hand, the first theosophical books I read were by them and it did help me cross the bridge from materialism into an alternative worldview.

Govert walked me through his working method and the research he has done last week, and though I probably don't agree with every identification in there (I haven't studied this stuff yet any more than you have) - this is the most thorough attempt at finding what Blavatsky meant by 'centenial cicle' that I know of. His work is based on Blavatsky hints, or so he says - as well as simply looking into occult history thoroughly.

Also: from what I've seen previous attempts at finding the centenial cycle were usually off by several decades. This was probably caused by the difficulty of finding the first seed of a certain movement. If Blavatsky's work had become known to only two dozen influential people, those influential people would have gone on into history, instead of Blavatsky herself. History reports on the famous, less on those that keep a low profile, even if they did influence the century after their time tremendously.

From what you write it seems to me you've studied the website rather superficially. Have you actually read the content of his material on 9-11, or were you only amazed that he actually takes the conspiracy theories around that event seriously enough to write about it? Seems to me he takes a thoroughly reasonable look at the whole thing and does not do more than say that the official version of events has definite holes in it - and then explores the said holes.

As theosophists we ought to know that people who take strange stuff seriously enough to investigate them, are not automatically crackpots.

I'm not personally interested enough in the centennial cycle or 9-11 to bother researching them (though if I find time I will probably read Govert's research on it) - but if I were, I would certainly make sure that I looked at every decent attempt at identification that had been tried, whatever the background of the researcher. And since Govert does a good job analysing material, his work is certainly worth a look.

Remember Katinka, I came through the "crackpot" (a word you used, not me) Alice Baileywick. That realm had many bright, sweet people; but I simply will not waste my time in looking for the few gems of truth that may lie with GS's work. Especially when mining the broad vein of original Theosophy, Mahayana & Vedanta keeps me fully occupied.

Perhaps I am too sensitive to pseudo-theosophy, but such is my attitude.

Hi everybody,

We have discussed whether or not there were Adepts appearing before Masters M and KH started the Theosophical Society in the 1800's.

Here is a link to a list of pre-TS Adepts, supplied to me by Sally Colbert of the San Diego ULT.

http://www.ultlon.freeserve.co.uk/predecessors.html

Hi everybody!

The San Diego ULT now has a list of "Pre-Blavatskian" Theosophists on their website.

http://www.theosophysandiego.org/Articles/...redecessors.htm

There is a list of people (Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Copernicus, Pico della Mirandola, Erasmus, Trithemius, Reuchlin, Luther) in the upper-left index. These people all have their own link and page.