Theosophy: Can we agree that tormenting people for all time is wrong no matter what?

[Thomas]

Hi Nick — thanks for the link to the Stanzas.

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Warning: the Stanzas are full of symbology, and are very difficult to understand.

Such is the case with all Sacred Texts, but it's always worth repeating.
I find when people talk about Christianity, they assume they know what the symbols mean ... many people get in an awful muddle over this.

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

As a matter of fact, I have dedicated myself to explaing them. It is hard work, but I am making great progress.

Good for you. Hermeneutics is an oft-forgotten discipline.

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

According to Theosophy, the Stanzas outdate the people of Israel by a lot ... This question requires me to give what seems to be a tricky answer. As you have previously noted, each version of scripture is unique to the culture that produces it. The Stanzas, however, are different. Theosophy claims the Stanzas were written by the Great Beings who actually created the Earth, as well as their directly-appointed assistants here on Earth. The Stanzas, therefore are not culture-specific (according to the theory).

In that, again, all Sacred Texts share in common the belief of a transcendant source?

If, as your answer suggests, the origin of the Stanzas is pre-historic (as indeed is the origin of some of the Scriptures), this raises the question of origin, and transmission.

Who are the Great Beings?
To whom did they transmit their revelation?
How was this recorded?
How was this passed on?
Is there not a 'people of the book' as it were?

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

--> Well, I guess it is all how you look at it. For me, it is puzzling.

That's my point about hermeneutics. If you understand that, the symbology becomes evident.

Thomas

[Thomas]

Hi Andrew —

Originally Posted by AndrewX

This is the kind of exchange I think we are after!

This is all I ever ask for.

Originally Posted by AndrewX

... As I have told you before, the New Testament holds in its pages all the knowledge of the universe. All the diffuse philosophical literature of the ages that preceded the Christian era was preparatory. The New Testament synthesizes all...

This Christian tradition would agree with.

Originally Posted by AndrewX

... but it has been so misunderstood and misinterpreted that we deemed it best to go back to the older philosophies, that they might explain the New Testament.

I think in the spirit of pluralism we can agree that Christian tradition would not agree with this, on the grounds of ...

Originally Posted by AndrewX

It is only through the old philosophies that it can be understood,

We would argue against this this from Scripture itself: one should not put new wine in old bottles (cf. Matthew 9:17, Mark 2:22, Luke 5:37) ... we would see the risk as misinterpreting the 'new', and simply repeating the 'old' — "And no man drinking old hath presently a mind to new: for he saith: The old is better." (Luke 5:39).

St Paul, whom you seem to hold in some regard, emphasises this point often:
"Therefore if any man [be] in Christ, [he is] a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." (2 Cr 5:17)

"Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, [even] the law of commandments [contained] in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, [so] making peace" (Eph 4:15)

"And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness" (Eph 4:24)

"And have put on the new [man], which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him" (Col 2:16)

And Revelations:
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth [it]" (Rev 2:17)

I only repeat all these texts because they, in the context again of the hermeneutic, point toward the 'New Covenant' in Christ, which cannot be explained by the old.

In our tradition then, we believe that Revelation contains and transmits the hermeneutic 'tools' necessary for its understanding (else God would be guilty of a radical failure of the most simple logic), so to look 'elsewhere' for an interpretation constitutes a lack of faith and fidelity to the text itself.

Thus we look only to those doctors, saints, sages, mystics and teachers who remain absolutely true and faithful to the text as synthesising everything to itself, rather than seeking a syncretic understanding.

It's a fine technical point, but all important to us ... once more, i hope in the spirit of pluralism it's something you can take on board, for it constitutes something that many of our greatest saints have fought and have died for, including St Paul himself:

"For both the Jews require signs: and the Greeks seek after wisdom. But we preach Christ crucified: unto the Jews indeed a stumblingblock, and unto the Gentiles foolishness" (1 Cor 1:22-23)

Thomas

[Nick the Pilot]

Thomas, you asked,

"...all Sacred Texts share in common the belief of a transcendant source?"

--> Theosophy says yes. I believe most Buddhists theologians would say no.

"Who are the Great Beings?"

--> They are alled the Kumara, also called the Asura, which Theosophy contends are the "us-people" mentioned in Genesis 1:26.

"To whom did they transmit their revelation? How was this passed on?"

The Stanzas are available to every High Initiate. Indeed, we can only assume High Initiates are required to study the Stanzas after their Initiation.

"How was this recorded?"

--> Records are kept on both the physical and astral planes. Here is a passage of Blavatsky herself reading from such astral records.

"An archaic manuscript — a collection of palm leaves made impermeable to water, fire, and air, by some specific unknown process — is before the writer's eye. On the first page is an immaculate white disk within a dull black ground. On the following page, the same disk, but with a central point. The first, the student knows to represent Kosmos in Eternity, before the re-awakening of still slumbering Energy, the emanation of the Word in later systems. The point in the hitherto immaculate Disk, Space and Eternity in Pralaya, denotes the dawn of differentiation...." (Secret Doctrine, vol 1, page 1)

You asked,

"Is there not a 'people of the book' as it were?"

No, if you are referring to a cultural group. Yes, if you are referring to all High Initiates on Earth.

[wil]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

...Worse yet, Theosophy says a great deal of coitus with animals began.

Not just a theosophical thing...the bible speaks to this...although we don't like to discuss it.

The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him." Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. ... But for Adam no suitable helper was found.

You say worse yet...the bible indicates this kind of action is not suitable...

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Thomas, you asked,

"...all Sacred Texts share in common the belief of a transcendant source?"

--> Theosophy says yes. I believe most Buddhists theologians would say no.

Marco Pallis, a Buddhist philosopher of the Tibetan school, would argue for the transcendant, although perhaps in terms theists might not realise. Pallis was greatly admired by the Dalai Lama, so I tend to count his view as authoritative with regard to the Buddhist tradition.

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

The Stanzas are available to every High Initiate. Indeed, we can only assume High Initiates are required to study the Stanzas after their Initiation.

Are you a High Initiate then?
What about the vast majority of humanity, who are not inclined to such studies?
Is this not elitist?
What about someone who has never heard of the Stanzas?
What about sdomeone who has, but has never met a High initiate to explain them?

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Records are kept on both the physical and astral planes.

Can I see them — they physical ones?
How old are the oldest copies?
How can we verify their accurate transmission?

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

No, if you are referring to a cultural group. Yes, if you are referring to all High Initiates on Earth.

Do these Initiates not exist in a physical culture/community?
Do they exist in isolation?
How does one contact an Initiate?
Who initiates them?
What if someone just declares himself an Initiate?
What is the base doctrine that must be believed to be an Initiate?

Thomas

[Nick the Pilot]

Wil-san! Yoroshiku! We discussed,

"Theosophy says a great deal of coitus with animals began. --> Not just a theosophical thing...the bible speaks to this...although we don't like to discuss it."

--> I was not aware of that. Thanks for pointing it out. Thus, we have found another commonality between the two traditions, and that is a good thing.

"You say worse yet...the bible indicates this kind of action is not suitable..."

--> I was comparing human-human to human-animal coitus (thus the worseness). I was not comparing the Theosophical version to the Christian version.

[Thomas]

Hi Nick, sorry, another question I kept meaning to ask:

If you see the one source for Theosophy's and Christianity's Sacred Texts, and now it would appear the texts are radically different (to each other), at what point in history did the two part company?

Thomas

[wil]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

"You say worse yet...the bible indicates this kind of action is not suitable..."
--> I was comparing human-human to human-animal coitus (thus the worseness). I was not comparing the Theosophical version to the Christian version.

and that is exactly what I was indicating the bible indicated was not suitable...hence G!d made a suitable helpmeet....woman...

[Thomas]

Me again, Nick ... something I also meant to pick up on:

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Yes, the story of Adam and Eve is the story of sex. The two Biblical symbols are the snake and the fruit (seed) — clearly two sexual symbols. The idea of the "snake" telling us to partake of the "seed" now becomes a much more graphic picture.

If sex is the issue, why mask it in symbol? I understand the function of a symbol is to make visible and present something that has been occluded. The act between Adam and Eve itself is immediate and apparent — moreso because we too have an apetite for that act — are you saying the act alone is forbidden?

By the way, the Anonymous Author of "Meditations on the Tarot", who was very receptive of Theosophical speculation, interprets the symbols of snake and fruit differently, and cogently, as an a priori teaching within the context of traditional symbolism, which surely opens up other interpretations?

Thomas

[Nick the Pilot]

Thomas, we discussed,

"...all Sacred Texts share in common the belief of a transcendant source? --> Theosophy says yes. I believe most Buddhists theologians would say no. --> Marco Pallis, a Buddhist philosopher of the Tibetan school, would argue for the transcendant..."

--> As you may know, this is a big bug-a-boo between Buddhists and Theosophists. Theosophy agrees with Marco Pallis, in that Buddhism does argue for the transcendant. You are also probably aware that the present-day popular versions of Buddhism do not.

"...I tend to count his view as authoritative with regard to the Buddhist tradition."

--> I am glad to hear that, as it shows more of a commonality between Christianity (& Theosophy) and Buddhism than most people realize.

"Are you a High Initiate then?"

--> Oh, my goodness, no. I have been recently involved in fascinating discussions about what we can do to become even Low Initiates.

What about the vast majority of humanity, who are not inclined to such studies?"

--> Clearly, most people are not ready to enter onto the Path (as described identically in Buddhism and Theosophy.) We can only ask them to purify their lives as much as possible, follow the Golden Rule, etc., etc.

"Is this not elitist?"

--> No, it is not. I am reminded of some Buddhists who say Enlightenment can only happen after many lives of hard work. Then there are other Buddhists who say Enlightenment can happen instantly for anyone. Theosophy blends the two ideas, saying anyone can achieve Enlightenment immediately, after many lives of hard work.

"What about someone who has never heard of the Stanzas?"

--> I suppose they can follow their own scripture for the time being. Truly living the Golden Rule will help anyone make great progress.

"What about someone who has, but has never met a High initiate to explain them?"

--> This is why I have dedicated myself to explaining them. Before I start to fall all over myself with profuse self-congratulations (ha), I must point out that there is a lot of Theosophical information on how people can accelerate their progress along the Path to Enlightenment.

"Records are kept on both the physical and astral planes. --> Can I see them — they physical ones?"

--> They are safely stored, away from marauders . Look at all of the book-burning that has occured down the centuries. Do not worry, marauders and book-burners will never find these books.

"How old are the oldest copies?"

--> I can only assume they date from the days when humans first walked the Earth.

"How can we verify their accurate transmission?"

--> We cannot. This is one of the reasons why Theosophy encourages questioning so much, and encourages us to throw out any ideas that we feel are goofy. Each person must take absolute responsibility for their own belief system, and not allow others to decide dogma for them (until they become Initiates, of course.)

"Do these Initiates not exist in a physical culture/community?"

--> This question has never really been answered. I can only make my best guess. Perhap they live on the astral plane, and materialize physical bodies only when they need them? Or they do have physical bodies just like us? Unfortunately, we can find references in the literature that refer to both possibilities.

"Do they exist in isolation?"

--> No, they are organized into a highly-structured Brotherhood.

"How does one contact an Initiate?"

--> One does not. One waits until their astral body glows like a golden beacon of light, and then the Initiates come looking for them.

"Who initiates them?"

--> The One Great Initiator of the World. The Brotherhood is organized nto a Hierarchy, with The One Great Initiator of the World at the top of the human/Earth part of the Hierarchy.

"What if someone just declares himself an Initiate?"

--> Then they have not joined the Brotherhood. Enlightenment and Nirvana are impossible for them, because both of these conditions are accomplished by invitation only.

"What is the base doctrine that must be believed to be an Initiate?"

--> Here is an extremely condensed version (with a lot of other information left out, due to a lack of space. We all need to work on these points:

Greed and Selfishness must be eliminated.
The hustle and bustle of everyday life needs to be re-directed.
Doing good deeds and service for humanity is emphasized.
Love must be taken to a high level.
Selfish love is transformed by Duty-to-Family into something higher.
This higher-love then goes out to all people.
Such a love then becomes divine.

These points are taken from the book, The Path of Discipleship,

Online:
Theosophy : Path of Discipleship by Annie Besant : AnandGholap.net

Hardcopy:
Quest Books

The above points only refer to people working to get on the Path. There are other lists for people on the Path, and even other lists for people preparing to enter Enlgihtenment.

For more on the topic, here is a great little book, At The Foot Of The Master.

Online:
Modern Theosophy: At The Feet of the Master, Alcyone

Hardcopy:
Quest Books

[Nick the Pilot]

Thomas, you asked,

"If sex is the issue, why mask it in symbol?"

--> I agree with you, in that such masking seems unnecessary. However, those writers felt the need to mask talk of sexuality from the population, and I can understand why they did that.

"I understand the function of a symbol is to make visible and present something that has been occluded. The act between Adam and Eve itself is immediate and apparent — moreso because we too have an apetite for that act — are you saying the act alone is forbidden?"

--> No, sex is not forbidden. Rampant, orgy-like sex is forbidden, along with beastiality. In my opinion, this is what the story of Adam and Eve is referring to.

"By the way, the Anonymous Author of "Meditations on the Tarot", who was very receptive of Theosophical speculation, interprets the symbols of snake and fruit differently, and cogently, as an a priori teaching within the context of traditional symbolism, which surely opens up other interpretations?"

--> As a matter of fact, this gets us into a fascinating part of Theosophy — the idea that no one person can accurately explain all of the symbology, and that each person must make up their own mind as to what each symbol symbolizes. I have seen Theosophical writers interpret parts of the literature very differently than me. This makes things more difficult, and also make them more interesting.

"If you see the one source for Theosophy's and Christianity's Sacred Texts, and now it would appear the texts are radically different (to each other), at what point in history did the two part company?"

--> I believe it happened at the beginning of the Hindu Culture, which I think Theosophy says first appeared about 10,000 years ago. (This is an off-the-top-of-my-head answer, and I would have to do some digging to get a more accurate answer.)

[AndrewX]

Originally Posted by Thomas

I only repeat all these texts because they, in the context again of the hermeneutic, point toward the 'New Covenant' in Christ, which cannot be explained by the old.

But you see, Thomas, in each of these quotations, you are speaking of the transformation that is only possible through Initiation. This is not Initiation as it has been brought down to earth, and degraded or de-sanctified by various organizations presuming to have spiritual authority. The Church itself, though once in possession of some of the secrets of Initiation, has never had the authority that Christ does. You may wish to disagree, but we will remain on different pages ... if so.

CHRIST HIMSELF (the World Teacher or Bodhisattva, as Nick may prefer), in the esoteric tradition, is the First Initiator. This holds true for the Birth and the Baptism. The 3rd, 4th and 5th Initiations are conducted by `the One Initiator,' as the Tibetan refers to Him. This is, for all intents & purposes, God. He is the `One' Initiator, because all Monads are ONE in Him, and it is only by proceeding through His actual Spiritual BEING, or Nous, that we `come to the God within' (Atma, and greater spiritual Principles).

Originally Posted by Thomas

In our tradition then, we believe that Revelation contains and transmits the hermeneutic 'tools' necessary for its understanding (else God would be guilty of a radical failure of the most simple logic), so to look 'elsewhere' for an interpretation constitutes a lack of faith and fidelity to the text itself.

But you see Thomas, with all due respect (and I do mean that), if you cannot even acknowledge that INITIATION is required as part of our very Spiritual unfoldment, the two going hand in hand and even being interchangeable terms to a large extent ... then we already have our proof - that what you say is incorrect! It is a simple Catch-22, you might say ... and I will agree.

If you don't realize that you do need to look elsewhere, since you obviously do not see St. Paul as speaking PLAINLY about the Initiatory tradition - evident in the Greek Mysteries as in every other culture & religion - then we really need not even CONSIDER the Christian ... until we can make this earlier recognition.

Originally Posted by Thomas

Thus we look only to those doctors, saints, sages, mystics and teachers who remain absolutely true and faithful to the text as synthesising everything to itself, rather than seeking a syncretic understanding.

And of course, if the Church does not know even her own secrets ... then this is not proof that they are not there; it simply gives more cause to look again at the statements of the Master Hiliarion. Or of course, we are free to refute and deny the teachings of an Initiate, who does know ... but I hope you will understand how to me, this is just plain short-sightedness. I do not say I do not understand why you might be hesitant, or feel slighted, or prefer to stick to your guns. After all, questioning one's assumptions CAN be quite challenging, and unsettling. But then, that's up to you!

Originally Posted by Thomas

What about the vast majority of humanity, who are not inclined to such studies?
Is this not elitist?
What about someone who has never heard of the Stanzas?
What about sdomeone who has, but has never met a High initiate to explain them?

It is not elitist, any more than for Christ to appear among us, and not to make a physical house-call to every single soul upon earth was elitist. Which would you prefer - Christ, or no Christ?

Those who have not heard of the Stanzas are in no way responsible for understanding the depth and breadth of their content, let alone for being Masters of their esoteric signficance. Shall you hold a person skilled in music and belonging to an orchestra in Europe responsible for the duties of lead architect on a building project in New York? Or shall you ask a child of five years of age to take on the obligations of a University professor of mathematics, or scholar?

Why should one necessarily have to meet a High Initiate in order to study and meditate upon the Stanzas? Should I be required to obtain several Divinity degrees before I am allowed to study the Christian Holy writings? Is it not possible for a layperson to gain some insight and understanding? What about the lectio divina you have mentioned?

Theosophists and esotericists believe that we will be able to learn much, and profit much, and be able to put our understanding into concrete practice, in numerous ways, by studying the Stanzas, and by considering the implications. How is this any different than what Christians expect and hope to gain by studying the Bible?

I fail to see the difference. The only difference I am aware of is that the Stanzas were not simply written down by HPB. She did have the benefit - the INSTRUCTION and DIRECTION, actually - of the Masters, High Initiates - to assist with the translation and provide the explanation. The result is The Secret Doctrine, which any of us may purchase, or access online, and study.

Now, just because you can read a book, even given a most wonderful explanation from the Wisest Beings alive upon the planet, does not mean, that you will grasp the deeper points, much less become an expert. Nor would a child of five be expected to read The Secret Doctrine, or be held accountable for understanding it. In esoteric communities, of which there are plenty, the parents and teaching groups will usually provide adapted versions, which children certainly are capable of understanding. Do not Christian groups have their color versions of picture Bibles?

Originally Posted by Thomas

Can I see them — they physical ones?
How old are the oldest copies?
How can we verify their accurate transmission?

Humanity is not yet capable of doing what you ask. You make the assumption that anyone who wishes to view these works - those that are physical - would be ready and able to appropriately handle the Wisdom and knowledge that is communicated by such study.

Humanity has proven, time and time again, that A) we ARE NOT ready for this kind of information, in its entirety - hence the reason for being given only those portions which we are prepared to put to use, as kind of an experiment, to see if we use this information to torture and kill each other, and exploit each other - or to improve the quality of life, to benefit one another, and to move closer to things Spiritual. Esoteric Wisdom and information would allow us, much of it, to literally destroy our entire planet; and this is actually already quite a grave risk.

And B) it has been shown that when the originals are available, entire LIBRARIES are destroyed. You think Alexandria was an accident? History only partially records the true reasons, if also the methods, of its destruction. Do you have any idea just what exactly was LOST? I know you do, yet I assure you - we probably would not NEED to have this conversation, had that Library survived.

Originally Posted by Thomas

Do these Initiates not exist in a physical culture/community?
Do they exist in isolation?
How does one contact an Initiate?
Who initiates them?
What if someone just declares himself an Initiate?
What is the base doctrine that must be believed to be an Initiate?

Yes, literally thousands of 3rd degree Initiates move amongst us. I suspect you know some. I have met a dozen or more. Such individuals will not even always understand their Initiatory status as such, but will, instead, simply be extremely effective, Spiritually-motivated and Service-oriented individuals. Notice I did not say religious.

Sometimes there are Communities, yet only one Initiate would be sufficient to organize, instruct and provide inner guidance for literally dozens, if not hundreds, of disciples and aspirants under instruction. Where these communities exist, around the world, you will find Service Projects of extraordinary calibre and quality.

The most esoteric of communities may be a bit more like small monasteries. The Ashram which HPB visited in Tibet, for example, was utterly esoteric, and could not be located on a map, with even the most technologically advanced spy planes or satellites. It is not just a matter of the Masters and Their communities being hidden in plain site; rather, it is a case of the deliberate exercise of a MAYA, for the purposes of preservation of the Hierarchy's safety, and the safeguarding of the Work. I can give a lengthier quote on this matter if you like, wherein the Master Morya makes it clear that this is the one, inviolable condition of the Hierarchy's continued activity upon the Earth.

Please read again my description of the terms used in the Pali and in the Sanskrit, from the Buddhist and the Hindu traditions, respectively, regarding Initiation. You can google these if you like, and if you prefer, stick to exoteric religious teaching, rather than reading what has been said by Theosophists and esotericists.

There are preliminary Initiations, which occur before the Birth. These are conducted by the Soul, directly - while we are out of the body, at night. Seldom will a person realize that this has occurred, though sometimes a vivid dream experience will give indication. This is something that can occur because the Soul is a Master, on its own plane. It is actually a kumara of a certain order, as Nick has mentioned ... though not as exalted or spiritually attained as Sanat Kumara and the 3 esoteric, 3 exoteric Kumaras of Hindu exotericism.

Once a person is ready for the 1st Initiation, or the 2nd (Baptism), the Christ must conduct the ceremony. You can read about such a ceremony online, here - for Jiddu Krishnamurti, supposedly his 2nd Initiation. Use this link, and search on `Wesak' ... it will be the 2nd hit on that page. You may also wish to read those sections in Leadbeater's book on Initiation. He gives a very clear presentation for the Western audience of the FACTS - as taken directly from Eastern exoteric teachings - about Initiation. He describes the fetters which must be cast off, per initiation. He answers most of the questions you asked, Thomas.

Note, however, that C.W. Leadbeater recorded this information subsequent to the publication of Alice Bailey's first book with the Tibetan Master, Initiation Human and Solar. That volume is far, far more detailed, it is more accurate, and moreover, it is the actual source of much of CWL's information. It is not that CWL copied from that volume; but the Tibetan does explain - and he goes on record as doing so, because it is quite important - that the information came out via Alice Bailey FIRST. Leadbeater was able to receive much of it, too, just not as direct dictation. He was clairvoyant, and psychically trained by the Masters, whereas Alice was NOT. But CWL did not receive dictations, as Alice did (at this point, in this case).

Nick may have answered some of these questions differently. I'm just now reading to catch up.

Cheers,

~Andrew

[AndrewX]

One final word on Initiation, from my understanding of how this has been taught - and regarding what occurred - with the Theosophical Society.

The book Masters and the Path, wherein C.W. Leadbeater has much useful and accurate information to say about Initiation, may be one of the last useful writings on the subject from a major Theosophical author. The only other that I am aware of as being an official Spokesperson, agent or Representative for the Masters, is Geoffrey Hodson.

In many ways, Geoffrey was the successor, in the Theosophical line of work, to H.P. Blavatsky. As such, his writings may be taken as authoritative. His Occult Diary, Light of the Sanctuary, is probably one of the most treasured volumes that I own ... and one of the most useful, for the student who wishes to understand something of the individual instructions and exchanges which are possible between an advanced esoteric student and the Masters.

Geoffrey also wrote 5 or more books under direct dictation from advanced Devas (Angels), these being Archangels of equivalent, or greater, status as a Master of the Wisdom. His clairvoyance was probably equalled by none in the 20th Century, and he was a far more capable seer and conscious sibyl than CWL ... though no slight is intended. At any rate, Geoffrey has plenty to say about the subject of Initation in his writings, often at the direct instruction of Master Polidorus Isurenus (formerly Philo Judaeus), his own Master, but also at the instruction of a dozen or more others.

What occurred within the Theosophical Society, following some of the unfortunate allegations (partially founded, at least) against CWL, was tragic, and a parody of the truth regarding esoteric Initiation. As the experiments with Krishnamurti continued, and the Order of the Star expectantly awaited the Messiah, CWL and others began pronouncing people Initiated left and right. People were supposedly becoming Arhats - 4th Degree Initiates, at the drop of a hat. And I suspect they often received such wonderful news in elation, with toothy smiles and an air of smug spiritual self-satisfaction. It is unfortunate that this kind of thing had to occur.

So indeed, what if we just pronounce ourself `Initiated!'

I suppose it is no different than pronouncing oneself spiritually `saved,' for esoterically, this is exactly what an Arhat essentially is. A 3rd Degree Initiate has witnessed the Lord, face to face, not as the blazing, 5-pointed Star, which living symbol shows up at the earlier two initiations (see the account of Krishnamurti's 2nd Init, above).

Rather, as per the Aaronic, or Priestly Blessing of Numbers 6:23-7, the true, occult FACE of the Lord has shone upon the face of the candidate, and he has been able to bear the increased electrical energy (FOHAT) which now circulates throughout his entire being ... which even our exoteric science will one day be able to clearly measure, in objective confirmation of all that is herein being indicated.

Blessed are the pure of heart (2nd Degree Initiates, those BAPTIZED), for they shall see God (receiving the Full Effects of His Presence, SHINING upon them, instead of the Star - His symbol ... at the earlier 2 ceremonies). Moses, as you will recall, needed to see the Lord as a burning bush, while still an Initiate of lower degree. So too, upon Mt. Sinai, he could not look upon the Lord directly, during his first encounters. Moses only later was able to speak with God, face to face.

Our various vehicles of consciousness are stimulated, one by one, per these ceremonies - and if you put this together, it will make more sense.

First Initiation - Birth - Etheric Body ... and Heart Chakra
Second Initiation - Baptism - Astral-Emotional Body ... and Throat Chakra
Third Initiation - Transfiguration - (Lower) Mental Body ... and Seven lesser head centers
Higher Initiatons - Renunciation, Resurrection, etc. - Soul vehicle (Causal body) & higher ... and Major Head Center, synthesizing the lesser centers

Also, it is the Soul that takes Initiation, not the personality.

[Thomas]

Hi Andrew —

Originally Posted by AndrewX

But you see, Thomas, in each of these quotations, you are speaking of the transformation that is only possible through Initiation.

Agreed. In our tradition this is instituted in Baptism and continually refreshed in the Liturgical life of the Church.

Originally Posted by AndrewX

The Church itself, though once in possession of some of the secrets of Initiation, has never had the authority that Christ does. You may wish to disagree, but we will remain on different pages ... if so.

Indeed I choose to exercise that option, and would hope you would expect nothing less, I regard these discussions as an exercise in pluralism, not proselytization.

I would hope you understand I do not share your low opinion of my Church, but in the spirit of pluralism I'm trying to avoid confrontation. Suffice to say our Scripture states explicitly the opposite, in His own words, so I don't see how you can support that without refuting our Scripture?

Originally Posted by AndrewX

CHRIST HIMSELF (the World Teacher or Bodhisattva, as Nick may prefer), in the esoteric tradition...

The particulars you outline shed light upon the intricacies of your faith tradition, which are of genuine interest to me, believe it or not, but my profession is otherwise. And as I well know you know, we see Christ in a different light.

Originally Posted by AndrewX

But you see Thomas, with all due respect (and I do mean that), if you cannot even acknowledge that INITIATION is required as part of our very Spiritual unfoldment, the two going hand in hand and even being interchangeable terms to a large extent ... then we already have our proof - that what you say is incorrect! It is a simple Catch-22, you might say ... and I will agree.

With all due respect, that's what the Sacraments are ...

Originally Posted by AndrewX

If you don't realize that you do need to look elsewhere, since you obviously do not see St. Paul as speaking PLAINLY about the Initiatory tradition - evident in the Greek Mysteries as in every other culture & religion - then we really need not even CONSIDER the Christian ... until we can make this earlier recognition.

Andrew, in the spirit of our new accord, please try and refrain from impugning my intelligence, or indeed the intelligence of the average Christian. I am increasingly at a loss to respond without refuting your claims for what we do and do not see or understand on the basis of what apears to be a lack of understanding or a blank refusal to accept the basics of Christianity on your part.

I do not expect a convversion, but I do ask for allowance that we might believe in a message other than your own.

Suffice to say "Sacrament" is the Latin synonym of the Greek "Mysterion", and furthermore in both Latin and Greek Churches we refer to the ongoing spiritual formation as Mystagogia ... armed with that, and your own knowledge of the iniatic aspects of the Greek mysteries, you should be better placed to understand what we are about.

For anyone else who may be in the dark, the word Mystery derives from the Greek Mysterion, which itself derives from the verb mu (or muo) "to shut or close the lips or eyes".

With regard to St Paul in particular, I am at a loss to see how anyone can view him in any other than a Christain context, else his Road to Damascus epiphany stands for nothing ... His words are known to the world via our Scriptures, after all. They in part define our faith. You cannot seriously expect me to agree that the Church champions his apostleship on the one hand, and then ignores his teaching on the other?

St Paul apart, there is Mark, the most 'naive' (according to the ignorance of some scholars) of the sacred scribes:
"And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all [these] things are done in parables" (Mark 4:11)

Originally Posted by AndrewX

And of course, if the Church does not know even her own secrets ...

Enough Andrew, please stop these barbed asides. I know I have offended you in the past, indeed we have knocked lumps out of each other here, and for my part, I apologise for the offence I have caused ... but I am no longer prepared to continue like this.

Thomas

[Thomas]

Hi Nick‚

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

As you may know, this is a big bug-a-boo between Buddhists and Theosophists. Theosophy agrees with Marco Pallis, in that Buddhism does argue for the transcendant. You are also probably aware that the present-day popular versions of Buddhism do not.

I wasn't aware of the contratemps between you. I concur with the notion that "present-day popular versions of Buddhism" covers a multitude of sins! Even from my distant perspective, a lot of what passes for 'Buddhism' in the West is far from what a Buddhist of the East would recognise. As an aside I think we are very lucky here at CR with the quality of informed Buddhist comment.

Thanks for the answers to other questions. That I make no comment does not mean I have ignored them, far from it, this brief exchange has covered much ground for me, and given me plenty to think about.

Books! More books! Books, the bane of my life! We have a joke on our course:‚ "five years study, 25 years' worth of reading to catch up on ... "

Quote: