Are Theosophy & Anthroposophy Religions?

[Bruce Michael]

Originally Posted by Bruce Michael

As a member you are required to believe in the Masters- even if you are a member of the Esoteric Section.

That should be, of course "As a member you are NOT required to believe in the Masters- even if you are a member of the Esoteric Section."

[AndrewX]

Originally Posted by Bruce Michael

The Masters follow Budhism- Wisdom. Of course all the Mahatmas respect Lord Buddha.

The original inspirer of the theosophical movement was Master C. R. HPB did move away from this influence.

According to Steiner the two main Eastern Masters are Kut Hoomi and Morya. The Western Masters are Christian Rosencreutz/Saint Germaine and Master Jesus/Zarathustra.

Kind Regards,
Br.Bruce

Br Bruce, Nick, et al,

Just for clarification, although there are many Masters discussed in the esoteric teachings, from HPB's day onward - in terms of modern Theosophy, yet also mentioned in every religious tradition - both East & West, it is fairly commonly accepted by Theosophists, certainly by students of Alice Bailey, Helena Roerich, Lucille Cedercrans, et al that all of these Masters belong to, and represent, One Occult Brotherhood - the Spiritual Government of our planet.

And this Brotherhood has been referred to since Alice Bailey's day onward, by a large group of esotericists, as the Hierarchy. More often, nowadays, I have heard another expression used, since `Brotherhood' isn't politically correct, and since `Hierarchy' sometimes fails to convey the original significance of the Eastern term Mahatma, or Master. The term I prefer, whether referring to an individual Master or the collective body of Earth's Spiritual Hierarchy ... is `Great Ones.'

My own inclination, in considering the Foundational Nature of HPB's Treatise, the SD, is to say, yes, Theosophy can be considered something of a religion (notwithstanding my earlier post on this thread) ... since there is a unique, Inspired spiritual text - Divinely originated. The Theosophist who has not considered the Masters as, literally, a Divine Source ... may do well to ask himself, And why not? Is not the very Heart of God Divine?

For that is what the Great Ones are, as we recognize the great Energy Center, the Heart, which They form in the body Logoic ... Humanity being the creative, throat center of the planet, and Shamballa equating with the Crown, or highest Head center. Other correspondences, of course, exist.

Now the Christian will hear none of this, because he does not accept, or feel that it is worth understanding, that GOD INCARNATES. Therefore, we are - beyond a certain point - speaking as to a wall, or to a thick, heavy brick. Once the mind has made itself up as to who, where and WHAT God `is' ... there will be no convincing the owner of that mind - for in fact, no real conversation is taking place, when we say things like, "God Loves us."

For the one person, this refers to a relationship - not a conditional one, and not something that we can bargain our way into. It means that it already exists, and that in fact, it always has - since the `Lamb that was slain from the Foundation of the world.' The other man, failing to consider the obvious implications of that most simple and telling (yet veiled) Occult phrase, seems to find it necessary to invent a second Divine sacrifice, as this is much, much easier than recognizing God's ORIGINAL one, God's continual one - and thus, our requirement of capitulation. Enter the most blasphemous idea of all, to accompany VICARIOUS ATONEMENT ... the SALE OF INDULGENCES.

So we are dealing with FUNDAMENTAL differences, as we speak of something like the Masters. I can deny that there are fish, or fruit, or even the Father, yet all of these - and more - exists. Either I will make room for them in my philosophy, and my understanding, or I will suffer for it ... and my grasp of things will be not just incomplete, it will be skewed.

And of course, it may thus NEVER become apparent, to some, that Jesus was an Initiate, just like Paul, after him. Paul, as we know, went through a great Conversion experience, analogous individually to the Tranfiguration, because IDENTICAL Spiritually ... opening the door to the Initiation that follows. And that Initiation awaits us all.

The Christ DOES descend, if we are considering Christ as a Cosmic, and also a Solar, even a Planetary Presence. Yet that Presence was not "born in Bethlehem, raised in Judea, crucified at Calvary and resurrected for the salvation of the faithful and the elect." These, as every Theosophist, Anthroposophist, esotericist knows - are the myths of the Church.

Sadly, they are the lost, buried myths, now little more than a story - though always a cause for hope, and still capable of providing a DOORway (the Gateway we know so well), for him who knocks, and who LOWERS HIS HEAD in order to enter. But that DOES mean the consideration of Truths and Teachings which may as yet be unfamiliar to us, for only a fool would imagine that God has provided all of His Wisdom and of Divine Understanding to you and I. We may have it available to us, yet it us up to US to accept what is offered, to apply it in our daily life, and find that additional doors begin to open up, all around us, as we travel the Via Dolorosa.

Were there no self-sacrifice necessary, THEN the billions of Christians upon the planet, and those of every faith & spiritual orientation, COULD SAY, "I am saved." But Theosophy has always taught of the PATH, and HPB only reminded us, today, of what that Path consists, in a presentation which was barely capable of reaching even the MOST elect of her own day. No wonder even 140 years later her Sacred Revelations are fools' fodder, for foolish, futile fighting.

I believe that Theosophy does, or can, constitute a religion, specifically in its presentation through HPB's Teachings onward, though also existing in other forms, such as Anthroposophy, the Teaching of Living Ethics (Agni Yoga), the `Blue Books' (Alice Bailey's writings via Master DK), `The Wisdom' (Master R's Teachings via Lucille Cedercrans), et al.

For the reasons that Neemai has cited, and given the Core Tenets as shown from HPB's day onward, anyone who embraces most or all of these principles could be said to be `a Theosophist' inasmuch as that person seeks to embody the Virtues of the Wisdom Religion, following that same great Path to Salvation as trodden by the Buddhas, the Christs, the Great Ones before us. This, then, becomes our RELIGION.

Nick, you and I are in general agreement, that there is a Bodhisattva, or a World Teacher, although you may prefer to state that the World Teacher is not the same as the Christ. While technically I disagree, I would say this: Nick, I feel that the `Christ of Churchianity' has little to do with Christ as the Bodhisattva, the World Teacher ... and I simply believe that the gradual, increasingly familiarity (in the minds of esoteric students both Western and Eastern) of the idea that Christ and the Bodhisattva are One, has been an intended teaching of The Great Ones all along.

If we ask, why didn't HPB then present this idea, especially if she (presumably) MET and even spoke DIRECTLY with the Christ - in the etheric, if not in the flesh, as it were - we open ourselves to some friendly, open-ended speculation. My own guess would be that, quite simply, the Lords of Liberation had not yet done Their Great Work of breaking up the existing forms. HPB, as we can clearly see, often embodied, or gave expression to a measure of that awesome energy, yet I would politely suggest that SHE DID NOT choose, either idly or flippantly, to critique the Roman Catholic Church (and Churchianity, as AAB later called it) ... any more so than she sought to see the utter failing of modern, even materialistic, science.

What she knew, because she DID hear it from the source, as it were, was quite a bit about the Plan (on higher levels), as well the more immediate Plans, of the Masters. She even had awareness and insights, some of it shown to her, regarding Humanity's next several decades, even centuries, of both spiritual and material evolution. She also had a clear enough understanding of the ultimate goals and path of progress for occult evolution upon our planet - in both this and future rounds, perhaps including much that is normally reserved for Higher Initiates (though obviously she did not have complete Initiatory awareness).

Getting back to the Christ, I believe, as plain and simiply as I can put it, that for the late 19th Century, she did everything in her power - and in accordance with the Will and the Instruction of the Great Ones (both her own, immediate Teachers, and also Those Who occasionally dictated or visited and assisted her) ... to further the Will, the Work, the Purpose, of the Christ - and therefore, had the information and various relationships that AAB gave out been possible, and/or helpful, it would have been done.

Frankly, I do not see how we can even begin to consider, contemplate, and TRUST (in) an Occult Hierarchy, yet imagine that such a Worker as HPB - who gave out what she did, as she did, sacrificing so much - could have failed in so important a task as saying, Oh, btw, Christ IS the Bodhisattva.

Yet we find CWL saying this at some point, and he might be thought of as a bridge, or providing a bridging understanding of how the Eastern and Western traditions are esoterically related ... both in terms of the past, as well as present and future.

The giften clairvoyant Geoffrey Hodson also contributed to the understanding of this matter, showing us that the great Angels and Archangels provide Inspiration, uplilftment and Inner Growth for the consciousness of the participants of every religious tradition ... be that Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, etc.

Alice Bailey certainly shows to what great extent the Buddha and the Christ are related, as Spiritual Brothers - and this, in an even deeper context than the customary, Brotherly relationship supposed to exist between all Masters, and amongst Their Highest Initiates ... as also being desirable of prevailing between ALL MEN (people) upon the planet.

But Jinarajadasa published a book about Christ and Buddha, which I now hold in my hand, as early as 1908. This was certainly well before Master DK's work with Alice Bailey, thus we can consider that somehow, for whatever reason, the Great Ones DID want us to know about the Hierarchy, and about its Rulership, and about the fact that ALL the Great Ones labour TOGETHER ... from at least this, early date ... though we will also see HPB speak plainly enough about The Brotherhood, even if she - it turns out - was primarily the Emissary of the TRANS-HIMALYAN Branch.

Again, I will say that metaphysically, soteriologically, we might talk about WHO AND WHAT IS `THE' Christ ... yet I think that Bruce, Nick and myself will be able to come to some measure of agreement that the Cosmic Christ - to whatever degree this PRESENCE has entered into our Solar System, and also our Planetary System - is NOT THE SAME as the Initiate, Jesus.

The Christian view might be, for some, that Christ became Jesus, but Thomas, this is not how the Wisdom Religion teaches it. This, from times predating Christianity by millions of years, though also FOLLOWING Christianity - and going forth at the direct Instruction of precisely this same CHRIST. For, whatever we may wish to call Him, esotericists still know Him - as we ALWAYS have - as `the HEAD of Earth's Spiritual Government,' even if between our various Schools there are differences of terminology, just as there is (such variation) between exoteric religions, in identifying this same Individual Presence upon our planet.

Christ exists - as a Principle - within each one of us, and I'll bet Nick and Br. Bruce and I can all narrow this down to one or two words, expressing this CENTRAL concept and Teaching, a most Fundamental one to all modern esoteric presentations. Exoteric religion itself tends to acknowledge it also, with varying degrees of clarity and insight.

My own preference is the term that has been adopted and popularized since Alice Bailey's teachings forward, and that is `Soul.' Another, equally helpful term that I am comfortable with, is `Human Goodness.' Either one must be understood as something INNATE, because God-Given, i.e. shared with or provided to each and every one of us ... and NOT dependent upon voiced affirmations, professed allegiances or articles of faith, much less other superficial characteristics - for its existence within us.

While Theosophy and Anthroposophy may or may not require students to express a firm belief in, and devotion to this Principle, my own opinion and finding is that anyone who `sticks with it' can't help but develop a growing recognition, and soon find(s) that this really is - what it's all about ... and by this point, we are much, much less concerned with questions like, Is or isn't my path a `religion' - we are more focused on how best to Lovingly, Intelligently (Wisely) Serve.

That said, I think discussions are in & of themselves a form of Service, especially those in which clarification can be given - in order to combat various extreme distortions, all-too-often INTENTIONALLY furthered for one's personal agendas. And the latter, coming into contact with the views of one's INSTITUTION, might even include - for a mere thirty pieces of silver - the very betrayal of one's Messiah ... however unwittingly and unknowlingly we may later realize our actions have been. Just let's not go about HANGING ourselves!

Namaskara

[Nick the Pilot]

Andrew, you said,

"Christ as the Bodhisattva, the World Teacher...."

--> This means that Gautama was Christ before Jesus was, and Kashapa (the Buddha before Gautama) was Christ before Gautama.

Is that what you are saying?

[AndrewX]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Andrew, you said,

"Christ as the Bodhisattva, the World Teacher...."

--> This means that Gautama was Christ before Jesus was, and Kashapa (the Buddha before Gautama) was Christ before Gautama.

Is that what you are saying?

The simplest answer is yes, when Kashyapa was Bodhisattva, or Christ, another INDIVIDUAL (Soul) was BUDDHA. These, both Bodhisattva (`Christ') and Buddha, are but Offices in the Brotherhood, the Occult Hierarchy.

Kashyapa became Buddha, and Shakyamuni, as a member of the MOON Humanity who was essentially an Arhat, but who also had a certain karma leftover (requiring service upon our planet, this Chain, this Round) ... moved up to `Christhood.'

HPB, I think, tried HARD to rescue this word - this concept, with its own history, word etymology, set of religious, spiritual, mythical and mystical associations, etc. - from the slime and mud of human ignorance, lest the Truth be lost forever. She was, as we know, only partly successful in conveying to us the true nature of the Path of Initiation, and of the HISTORY of our Planet, which is the STORY of Initiation.


But Christos, as she taught, is only the appellation, or title given, to the Candidate who has successfully passed the HIGHEST Initiation ... while the lesser candidate is chrestos. The latter has the equivalent meaning of "the worthy," being an interpreter of oracles ... while Christos means an `ANNOINTED' INITIATE. From de Purucker's Glossary:

Christ is a mystical expression for the human inner god, while chrest is the good but as yet unregenerated nature; using here the language of the Mysteries, Christ may be likened to Dionysos, Osiris, or Krishna, who will deliver the suffering Chrest, mankind or Prometheus, in its trial. It is Christos that incarnates in Chrestos. These usages were taken over by the Gnostic schools out of which Christianity largely sprang, and there is abundant evidence to be found among the early Christian writers and the Gnostics themselves that the adherents originally called themselves Chrestians.

Here, in brief, is the entire SUMMARY of esoteric Christianity ... for him who hath the eyes and ears to behold it! Begin to apply the chains and irons, and try to steal away with the simplicity of THEOS SOPHIA ... and soon it is the blind, leading the blind. A Light is Shining, but not even that much is understood ... and so our greatest GIFT becomes man's darkest curse.

"The mind is the great slayer of the Real."

Notice, moreover, how greatly the Truth becomes distorted when God's Wisdom becomes coveted, and when the Teachings become slandered. Again, quoting de Purucker on `Christos':

Christos (Greek) Anointed; applied in the Greek Mysteries to a candidate who had passed the last degree and become a full initiate. Also the immanent individual god in a person, equivalent in some respects to Dionysos, Krishna, etc. The Hebrew word for anointed (mashiah) is generally written in English as Messiah. What we know as Christianity is a syncretism of borrowings from Neoplatonism, neo-Pythagoreanism, Greek Gnosticism, and Hebrew religion. Christos was commonly used in the Greek translation of the Bible as a title of the Jewish Kings, those who had been anointed for reigning -- a symbolic rite taken originally from the Mysteries. St. Paul's use of the word shows that he understood its true mystical meaning, but spoke with precaution in his public epistles or writings.

Here, then, is the REAL syncretism ... and I have pointed this out before, in linking to a paper written by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., on The Influence of the Mystery Religions on Christianity. Naturally, one cannot expect to glean anything by merely glancing at this paper ... or even by skimming it, if by BIAS and BITTERNESS we are blinded to the gems that Dr. King has revealed to us.


Yet, while pretending that Christianity suddenly SPRANG from the ground in its complete, or MODERN form - or at best, suggesting that gradual adjustment brought us to today's perfect expression ... we have those among us who will DARE to CUT THE VERY TWIGS and LEAVES of ONE SEASON'S GROWTH from the ANCIENT TREE of God's Holy Wisdom ... and PRESUME to call their harvest COMPLETE, unadulterated Truth!!!

The real kicker here, is not that the pot is calling the kettle black ...

... but that the TAIL is trying to wag the DOG.

GOOD TRY, brother Jesuit ...

As for any kind of sincere conversation about the Inspiration, Life - the very SOUL of both original and modern Christianity ... I am open to discussing FRACTAL patterns - how the least part reproduces the nature of the Whole. God can be discovered, known and approached within any tradition, or shall we say, by ANY sincere Seeker - especially where a sound tradition is available to lend its assistance. So long as we can MUTUALLY ACKNOWLEDGE the Presence of God both within each other's chosen tradition (or Spiritual/religious Path) - and Ideally also within each other's Heart & Mind (yes, even the HUMAN aspects thereof) - THEN we on common ground, and can actually enjoy discussion and ... friendly debate.

Else, one (or both) of us is living a LIE. {And that is what movitates me to say:}

Until it can be recognized that Christ indwells every human heart as inherent Good, as also St. Paul's HOPE OF GLORY (fully realized in those who have become ADEPT, in all the ways that God asks) ... I'm not sure what Christian speculation has to offer to the esoteric tradition.

We are discussing whether or not Theosophy and Anthroposophy are religions, and if I were to take Ninian Smart's seven aspects of religious belief, as Snoopy originally posted,I think I could make a pretty strong case for modern esotericism (INCLUSIVE of, but not limited to, Theosophy and Anthroposophy) ... fulfilling ALL of these functions - and also exceeding them.

Modern Theosophy, and related movements, are actually Foundational, in relation to a future World Religion, while, currently - as Nick, Bruce and others have discussed - these movements typically provide significant freedom of individual practice, and choice of doctrinal belief. There are core tenets that we can discuss, even reaching across all, or most, of these various related movements - or SCHOOLS - and I think THAT is the direction in which we ought to be heading ...

[Nick the Pilot]

Andrew,

You are saying that "Christ" is a title for the present Bodhisattva or the World Teacher, and that the Christhood is handed from one Bodhisattva to the next.

Well, that is certainly an interesting way of looking at it.

[AndrewX]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Andrew,

You are saying that "Christ" is a title for the present Bodhisattva or the World Teacher, and that the Christhood is handed from one Bodhisattva to the next.

Well, that is certainly an interesting way of looking at it.

Yes, but it might lead one to think, aha, so only those specific members of the Occult Hierarchy are `Christs.' We should substitute the word `Master' for Christ, and ask, are the only Masters those Who exist within our Hierarchy?

And we see that the answer is no, there are `Masters' - or Beings of an equivalent evolutionary status (and Spiritual attainment) - on every planet (of every System!) ... either that, or there were, or there shall be. Further, there are Adepts Who have attained the Goal of Human evolution upon OUR planet, and have moved on to the Way of Higher Evolution.

So it would be quite a mistake to say, the Masters are just a group of Enlightened, advanced Humanity upon THIS planet!

And it would be equally wrong to say that there has only ever been one Christ, if we are speaking of the OFFICE in the Occult Brotherhood.

We can also choose to refer to Innate Human Goodness as the Christ within, perhaps equating this with Buddhi, as some authors have, or with the Soul, which is closer to being accurate (HPB suggests the Monad Itself as the Christ, a Son of the Father, in the sense that most Theosophists will recognize).

St. Paul, in the mystical language of the day, and drawing heavily from the Greek Mystery Traditions, acknowledges this PRINCIPLE within us all. And even the later Christian theologians often speak of Christ dormant, or sleeping within the human heart.

So there is a lesser Christ, if you will, which is the HUMAN SOUL - although this is not really a lesser Christ in fact ... just a condition which applies to the relationship between the Agnishvatta and the incarnated Monad, showing forth in every Individualized human being (pre-Arhatship) as the personality. The latter, the lesser self, contains the spark, or seed of the true Christos (in the de Purucker quote), veiled within, and embodied for us by the Agnishvatta, or chrestos. For, what else can be meant by "the good but unregenerated nature?"

Actually, I would say that chrestos is the HUMAN Soul, yet in its overshadowing aspect ... and although this is not identical with the Agnishvatta, it may temporarily be considered as such - until the Soul is freed, and this makes of man a Christ, anyway!

But Christ, I also believe, exists in a Cosmic Aspect ... as the 2nd Logos, corresponding to the 2nd Ray, and this has everything to do with Sol Invictus, with Sun worship, with the Solar Deity - of EVERY tradition ... as ours is a 2nd Ray (Solar) Logos, upon the Cosmic Ray of Love-Wisdom. In the previous System (Kalpa), it was Active Intelligence which was the primary conditioning influence. In the following cycle, it will be Will, or Purpose. Yet because the current cycle is a 2nd Ray cycle, we could say that our entire Solar System incarnates - or expresses - the Christ Aspect.

I will go with Christianity, on this, but only in acknowledging that the Christian tradition, like all others, has recognized the Primeval, Supreme TRINITY ... as it has been reflected into our particular Solar System, then mirrored, again, here into our Planetary Life ... and finally, expressed for Humanity. Hinduism knows this same Trinity, as does Buddhism, Judaism, etc.

To take such a profound, deeply symbolic passage as John 3:16 and anthropomorphize, is to miss the point entirely. In simplest, clearest Theosophical language, we know that God "so loving" the world, means that the evolved Cosmos (System, Planet, etc.) only expressed the 3rd Aspect at one point ... the most material of God's 3 Aspects (the Holy Spirit, nonetheless).

Into this primordial condition of things, the 2nd outpouring - or Son - was sent forth to ENSOUL the newly prepared Cosmos, or System. Even on the individual, human scale, we see this process repeat itself with each new incarnation ... as the building angels do their preliminary work, prior to the descent of the Soul into the world that has been prepared for it!

And why all this? WHY does this take place, cycle after cycle - from the very GRANDEST down to the very life (and lives) of the atom itself?

Because God so loved the world! And that may be a 2nd Ray, Love-Wisdom expression ... yet it is also the Will, or the agency, of the 1st Aspect, or Godhead. All of this, only possible because of "the Lamb slain from the Foundation of the world," showing that the Creation of our Cosmos (and every lesser, or microcosmic entity/system therein) involves self-sacrifice.

Curiously, by no less a method does Humanity, the Greatest among us as well as the least, give up what it has eventually outgrown - and move onward to the next stage, or phase, in the Divine Plan. Resistance, the holding on to that which should be relinquished, is what essentially constitutes evil.

These ideas seem so logical to me, so matter-of-fact, if I may ... that I beg forgiveness for my tendency to assume that others just automatically share my view(s). I do realize that this is not always the case, and certainly, even when a common understanding is already in place, we often find that each of us has our own language, our own terminology and personal experiences, which give validity to our worldview.

We are (collectively, on a planetary scale, even while in smaller, group formats) forging new connections, new links in the network, and I am quite excited that we are able to do this!

What I sometimes find amazing, and quite wonderful, is that despite our various differences (of interpretation, of background, of interest in the Teachings, etc.), we find so many points of agreement, and of mutual intrigue, or interest. Sometimes we get quite involved discussing what is in the footnote on page 53, or what happened during the end of the 3rd Root Race ... yet we can also ponder the implications of the teachings for our present time.

Alice Bailey, for example, teaches that Christ's Reappearance is, truly, quite imminent ... and that with Him there come numerous Masters, and their Ashrams. This is not something we can immediately gather by reading The Mahatma Letters, though I do think there are probably hints.

I am not as familiar with Steiner's indications regarding Christ's Reappeance, though I do believe he was able to say things which the generations of Theosophists before him were not.

Alice Bailey speaks of a third change in our world as coincident with, or part of, Christ's Reappearance. And that is the Restoration of the Mysteries. We have the statement of the Master of Masters Himself 2000 years ago as indicative of what this involves, for Christ made it clear that He came "not to destroy, but to fulfil, the Law."

Whatever our particular religion, or spiritual path and discipline may be ... it is hoped that we are looking forward, even enthusiastically, to the Reappearance of a World Teacher, under whatever name we know [Him]. If that is the case, we can be equally expectant of a next phase in the Divine Revelation - or the dialogue between the Divine, and Humanity. For some of us, that Revelation is well underway. For others, I only ask that one show the same respect for that Revelation which we hold Sacred ... as you ask from us, pertaining to the Revelation which you hold Sacred.

NAMASKAR

[Thomas]

Hi Nick —

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Here the Blavatskian view of Jesus differs with what Andrew (a follower of the Bailey School) and Bruce (a follower of the Steiner School) believe.

Thanks for the clarification.

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

According to HPB's Theosophy, Jesus was only an Initiate — his deification was only proclaimed by later Christians.

This is a claim not uncommon closer to home. The anti-supernaturalist dogmas of Enlightenment pietism in Germany began the process. The deist Reimarus set the ball rolling in a work in 1774 (published six years after his death), arguing that Jesus was a Jewish revolutionary who was executed, that his followers rewrote the story of his life, elevating him to a deity.

The rationalist Strauss (1808-74) followed. Whereas Reimarus sought to dismiss Jesus entirely as a religion founded on a non-event, Strauss sought to show rescue the 'historical' Jesus from the 'myth' of the Gospels.

Bultmann, whose work dominated 20th century NT studies, went a step further. Jesus might not even existed, nor did he need to. The Gospels are born of the spiritual impetus in man — Jesus signifies the progress from a prescientific mythology to modern existentialism ... and all that is left of the historical figure are a few sayings which present man with this timeless existential challenge.

The Romance Movement was a reaction against Enlightenment rationalism, and went to the other extreme. This movement gave birth to the Gothic Novel, the 'theory of the sublime' in art, and the spiritualist and spiritist movements in Europe and the Americas.

(Both these movements fed into a basic philosophical foundation of 'liberal Christianity' today, although I doubt many will realise the often very anti-Christian roots of the liberal Christian hermeneutic.)

Each movement, and each submovement, declared 'objectivity' as his priority, and each, and others, have come up with radically different pictures — more now than ever before, which I refer to as 'the Christ of our own invention'. Names such as Schweitzer, Holzmann, 'The Jesus Seminar' on the one hand, Swedenborg, Mesmer, Gurdjeiff, Ouspensky, Blavatsky, Bailey and Steiner on the other ...

Modern philosophical discussion has gone on to detail how these differences only serve to show that 'objectivity' is itself a positivist myth. One has to take into account the event, the point of view of the perceiver, and one's own preconception when addressing such issues.

I tend to side with Prof. Huston Smith who I think coined the term "coffee table spirituality" and "pick 'n' mix religion" for the post-Enlightenment movements. Of course, in our post-Modernist era, the situation has become more confused than ever.

The debate continues.

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Andrew and Bruce, on the other hand, are more willing to see Jesus as a type of Deity. The Masters that Bruce were mentioned were Buddhists.

Well I can't speak for Buddhist philosophy, but a 'type of deity' just doesn't fit the metaphysic of the Abrahamic Traditions. There deity can by definition only be one ... there can only be one Absolute, one Infinite ... again it depends on who's definition of 'deity' you're working to, and importing non-native definitions can only lead to confusion, which is precisely how the Christian views such notions of a 'synthesis' — how can anyone offer a workable synthesise of something he evidently does not understand?

It's interesting that the 'versions' of Christology prevalent today ask questions that were asked and worked out in the first few Christian centuries. The tragedy is that people are ignorant of the thought and philosophy that went into the Church's dogmatic definitions.

As ever, the major point is that post-Romance responses are fundamentally cosmological — "The Secret Doctine" is bulging at the seams with it; "Meditations on the Tarot" is an exegesis of Christians Hermeticism second to none ... but the world's great Traditions: the Abrahamic, Hindu, Brahmin, Buddhist and Daoist are principally and primarily metacosmic.

Thomas

[Bruce Michael]

Hi Nick,

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

You may ask yourself, if Christians believe in Jesus, yet Theosophy does not teach of his divinity, why do Christians even come to a Theosophical class?

In reality "Theosophy" doesn't "teach"- theosophical teachers/authors teach.

As I brought before:
There is no Eastern, Western, Christian or Buddhist Theosophy:

"We must learn completely to overcome the inclination to a theosophy of a definite stamp and colouring. It has gradually come about in the history of evolution that theosophies have tended to receive a certain nuance and colouring in accordance — I will not say with religious prejudices, but with religious preconceived feelings and opinions. Theosophy needs to keep constantly in view its ideal, — to be a reflection of occultism. There can therefore be no such thing as a Buddhist theosophy or a Hindu theosophy, or a Zoroastrian or a Christian. Naturally, regard must be had to the characteristic ideas and thoughts with which particular people will approach theosophy."
Dr.Steiner

That is the high ideal that brings about a true cosmopolitanism.

Best Wishes,
Br.Bruce
Our ideal, however, must always be to meet the one point of view with just as much understanding as the other and to establish over the whole earth a harmonious and peaceful relationship based on mutual comprehension.

[Bruce Michael]

Originally Posted by Bruce Michael

According to Steiner the two main Eastern Masters are Kut Hoomi and Morya. The Western Masters are Christian Rosencreutz/Saint Germaine and Master Jesus/Zarathustra.

Just to add to that:

Rudolf Steiner [GA 113 - August 31, 1909]:

"We are speaking of three great spiritual beings and individualities, when we
mention the names of Zarathustra, Gautama Buddha and Skythianos. We are speaking of incarnations of Bodhisattvas, when we mention the names of Skythianos, Zarathustra and Buddha." (J-M's translation)