|
H.P. Blavatsky was the first person to introduce the concept
of the Mahatmas (also called adepts or Masters) to the West.
At first she talked about them privately, but after a few
years two of these adepts, known by the pseudonyms of Koot
Hoomi (K.H.) and Morya (M.), agreed to maintain a correspondence
with a couple of British Theosophists—A. P. Sinnett
and A. O. Hume. This communication took place from 1880
to 1885, and during those years the knowledge about the
Mahatmas became more and more public. The original letters
are currently kept in the British Library in London as a
valuable historical item, and have been published under
the title of The Mahatma Letters. This book remains
an unparalleled first-hand source of information about the
Mahatmas and their teachings.
In 1930, fifty years after this correspondence began, Guy
Ballard, a former student of Theosophy, was allegedly contacted
during a hike on California’s Mount Shasta by a mysterious
nonphysical character. This figure identified himself as
one of the Theosophical Mahatmas, the eighteenth-century
occultist known as the Comte de St. Germain. He charged
Ballard with the task of transmitting the lessons of “the
Great Law of Life,” giving rise to what became called
“the I AM movement.”
Ballard and his wife Edna soon gained a wide following
with their version of St. Germain’s teachings, creating
the Saint Germain Foundation in 1932. The I AM movement
reached its heyday in the late 1930s; Guy Ballard’s
death in 1939, combined with subsequent legal challenges,
including a suit launched by the federal government alleging
postal fraud, caused it to diminish. The organization continues
to exist today, but keeps a low profile (Hanegraaff, 2:587).
The Ascended Master movement reached another stage in 1958,
when Mark Prophet, a former student of the Saint Germain
Foundation, claimed he was commissioned by “the Ascended
Master El Morya” to transmit the teachings of the Great
White Brotherhood through an organization called the Summit
Lighthouse. Upon Mark Prophet’s death in 1973, leadership
of the organization was taken over by his wife, Elizabeth
Clare Prophet, who changed its name to the Church Universal
and Triumphant. In 1999, Prophet retired from her activities
with the church; she died in 2009 (Hanegraaff, 2:1093–96).
Today, largely as a result of the I AM movement and the
Prophets’ activities, the idea of the Ascended Masters
is prevalent in the New Age. Since the Ballards and the
Prophets used the names and portraits of the Theosophical
Mahatmas for their Ascended Masters, many people assume
that they are the same. However, as we are going to see
in this article, they differ in some very important respects.
Ascended or Living?
The Ascended Masters, as their name suggests, are supposed
to be Masters who have experienced the miracle of ascension,
as it is said Jesus did. The original teaching, channeled
by Guy Ballard, was that a new Ascended Master would not
die but would take the body up with him. This teaching of
ascension is in direct opposition to the Theosophical teachings.
Mahatma K.H. refers to the idea disparagingly in one of
his letters to Sinnett: “There was but one hysterical
woman alleged to have been present at the pretended ascension,
and . . . the phenomenon has never been corroborated by
repetition” (Barker and Chin, 5). HPB also rejects
ascension as a fact, calling it “an allegory as old
as the world” (Blavatsky, Collected Writings
8:389; see also 4:359-60).
After Ballard (who was supposed to have reached the stage
of ascension) died of cardiac arterial sclerosis but did
not take his body with him, his wife, Edna, said that one
could actually ascend after the body died. Thus the idea
of ascension changed during the years, and today Ascended
Masters are regarded as disembodied spirits, having transcended
their physical bodies. This, again, is contrary to the Theosophical
teaching about the Mahatmas. In the early days of the TS,
before people in the West knew anything about the Masters,
Henry Steel Olcott began to receive letters from some of
them. In one early letter, the Master Serapis wrote: “The
time is come to let thee know who I am. I am not a disembodied
spirit, brother. I am a living man” (Jinarajadasa [2002],
2:23). That they are living men was verified by HPB, who
lived with some of them near Tibet for several years while
undergoing her occult training. Later Olcott and several
other Theosophists also met some Mahatmas in their physical
bodies at different times and in different parts of the
world.
The fact that the Mahatmas retain their bodies is of great
importance. They are enlightened yogis, similar in certain
respects to those traditionally known in the East. But there
is a difference. An enlightened one, after having realized
Truth, has gained the right to merge with the All in a state
of absolute bliss (called moksha or nirvana).
This prevents him from being in touch with humanity, since
he has to abandon the lower vehicles of consciousness. By
contrast, the Theosophical Masters, out of compassion, decide
to give up entering into nirvana so that they remain
able to help us in our struggle to realize Truth:
The Master must be in a human body, must be incarnate.
Many who reach this level no longer take up the burden
of the flesh, but using only “the spiritual body”
pass out of touch with this earth, and inhabit only loftier
realms of existence. (Besant, 49)
The Mahatmas are in this respect what the Mahayana Buddhists
call bodhisattvas. They choose to retain the body,
not because of any fault in their development but as an
act of self-sacrifice. Possessing a physical body subjects
the adepts to certain unavoidable limitations. As Blavatsky
said, they “are living men, born as we are born, and
doomed to die like every mortal” (Blavatsky [1987],
288). Being perfect yogis, they have learned how to take
care of their bodies so that they can live much longer than
ordinary human beings; nevertheless, the bodies must eventually
die.
The Mahatma Letters have several statements about
the limitations intrinsic in leading a physical existence.
For example, Mahatma K.H. wrote: “I was physically
very tired by a ride of 48 hours consecutively” (Barker
and Chin, 398). He also stated that he is limited to his
physical senses and the functions of his brain “when
I sit at my meals, or when I am dressing, reading or otherwise
occupied” (Barker and Chin, 257).
But the physical body is where the Masters’ evolutionary
development is the least apparent. It is said that if we
see an adept on the physical plane, we may not even recognize
him as anything more than a good and wise man. Yet on the
inner planes, his nature is far beyond that of those who
are still caught in the illusion. In their letters, the
Mahatmas differentiate between the “inner man”
(the spiritual Self of the adept which is relatively omniscient
and beyond limitations) and “the outer man,” which
is a very limited expression of the spiritual Self working
through the psychophysical personality. This is why K.H.
wrote: “We are not infallible, all-foreseeing ‘Mahatmas’
at every hour of the day” (Barker and Chin, 450). As
he explained: “An adept—the highest as the lowest—is
one only during the exercise of his occult powers”
(Barker and Chin, 257).
These adepts, then, are not like the Ascended Masters of
the New Age, who are said to become Godlike, all-powerful
beings beyond the laws of nature. In their teachings, the
Mahatmas even denied that such beings exist. K.H. wrote:
“If we had the powers of the imaginary Personal God,
and the universal and immutable laws were but toys to play
with, then indeed might we have created conditions that
would have turned this earth into an Arcadia for lofty souls”
(Barker and Chin, 474). In their letters, the Mahatmas constantly
talk about the “immutable laws” of the universe,
and that they can help humanity only within the limits of
these laws. They cannot produce a New Age magically; whether
we like it or not, this is our job.
Proponents of the Ascended Masters sometimes attempt to
account for these discrepancies by claiming that when the
TS was founded most of the Theosophical Mahatmas were still
“unascended Masters.” This leaves room to detach
the Ascended Masters from the limitations that all the Mahatmas,
“the highest as the lowest,” are said to have.
But according to the Theosophical teachings, the higher
the adept, the less we are likely to hear from him:
The more spiritual the Adept becomes, the less can he
meddle with mundane, gross affairs and the more he has
to confine himself to a spiritual work. . . . The very
high Adepts, therefore, do help humanity, but only spiritually:
they are constitutionally incapable of meddling with worldly
affairs. (Blavatsky, Collected Writings, 6:247)
Another feature of the Ascended Masters teachings is that
they are mainly concerned with the “form aspect”
of the Masters (their appearance, names, character, etc.).
The Theosophical view, when properly understood, is very
different. Blavatsky wrote, “The real mahatma is then
not his physical body but that higher Manas [the spiritual
Mind] which is inseparably linked to the Atma [the real
Self] and its vehicle [the spiritual Soul].” And she
adds that whoever wants to “see” a Mahatma has
to elevate his perception to the spiritual planes, because
“higher things can be perceived only by a sense pertaining
to those higher things.” The spiritual planes, where
forms and separation vanish and unity prevails, are far
higher than the psychic planes, which are the ones contacted
by natural seers. Those who can reach the high state of
consciousness that transcends all sense of separateness
“will see the mahatma wherever he may be, for, being
merged into the sixth and the seventh principles, which
are ubiquitous and omnipresent, the mahatmas may be said
to be everywhere” (Blavatsky, Collected Writings,
6:239).
The real Mahatma is thus seen mainly as a spiritual state
of consciousness, and the forms assumed by his personal
aspect are just shadows. To be sure, we can find descriptions
of the form aspect of the Mahatmas in the Theosophical literature,
not because this aspect is important in itself, but because
it provides something for our limited minds to grasp and
comprehend. But this personal aspect is meant to be transcended,
and whoever is content with it is stuck in the world of
illusion.
The Masters’ Work for Humanity
Today thousands of people claim they are channeling the
Ascended Masters. It is clear that these Ascended Masters
have their attention focused on this physical plane, doing
little more than communicating with us through channels.
This is, again, another basic difference with the Theosophical
teachings. In Theosophy, as well as in most serious spiritual
traditions, this physical plane is seen as an illusion.
The Maha Chohan, one of the highest adepts, said: “Teach
the people to see that life on this earth, even the happiest,
is but a burden and an illusion” (Jinarajadasa [1988],
1:6-7). This concept echoes the teachings of Plato, who
said this world is just the shadow of Reality. It is also
related to the first Noble Truth the Buddha taught after
his enlightenment: “All is dukkha (suffering)
in this world.”
Consequently, as Annie Besant said of the Masters, “the
least part of their work is done here,” in connection
with the physical plane (quoted in Codd [1988], 45). This
is one reason why they live in seclusion—most of their
activity takes place on the higher planes. This, in fact,
is based on a profound knowledge of the structure of the
cosmos:
It will be easily seen by any one who examines the nature
of occult dynamics, that a given amount of energy expended
on the spiritual or astral plane is productive of far
greater results than the same amount expended on the physical
objective plane of existence. (Blavatsky, Collected
Writings, 5:338-39)
So what is the Masters’ work on these higher planes?
This complex subject is beyond the scope of this article.
When asked about this, Blavatsky answered: “You would
hardly understand, unless you were an Adept. But they keep
alive the spiritual life of mankind” (Blavatsky, Collected
Writings, 8:401).
By contrast, channeled communications from the Ascended
Masters display a great concern with the physical lives
and desires of their followers. The Ascended Master literature
is filled with promises of magical miracles of health, limitless
wealth, and perfect happiness, and “decrees” are
given to enable people to “manifest” these things
in their lives. This attitude is the exact opposite of the
Theosophical one.
Theosophy says that the psychological ego is false, that
the idea that we are this body, emotions, and mind is a
mistake of perception and the source of sorrow. It says
that real happiness comes only as an unsought by-product
of reducing rather than increasing our attachment and identification
with the personal. This is why Blavatsky wrote that “Occultism
is not . . . the pursuit of happiness as man understands
the word; for the first step is sacrifice, the second renunciation”
(Blavatsky, Collected Writings, 8:14. K.H. agreed
with this when he wrote: “We—the criticized and
misunderstood Brothers—we seek to bring men to sacrifice
their personality—a passing flash—for the welfare
of the whole humanity” (Barker and Chin, 222). The
Theosophical Mahatmas would never pay attention to personal
desires. During the early times of the Theosophical Society,
some members, completely misunderstanding the nature of
the Mahatmas, would bring HPB some personal requests to
ask of them. In a letter Blavatsky explained:
The Masters would not stoop for one moment to give a
thought to individual, private matters relating
but to one or even ten persons, their welfare, woes and
blisses in this world of Maya [illusion], to nothing except
questions of really universal importance. It is all you
Theosophists who have dragged down in your minds the ideals
of our Masters; you who have unconsciously and with the
best of intentions and full sincerity of good purpose,
desecrated Them, by thinking for one moment, and believing
that They would trouble Themselves with your business
matters, sons to be born, daughters to be married, houses
to be built, etc. etc. (Jinarajadasa [1923], iv; emphasis
here and in other quotations is from the original)
And yet this is exactly the kind of thing the Ascended
Masters seem to be concerned with. They even teach alleged
ways to dissolve unpleasant karma, a conception that the
Theosophical Mahatmas emphatically opposed. K.H. wrote:
Bear in mind that the slightest cause produced,
however unconsciously, and with whatever motive, cannot
be unmade, or its effects crossed in their progress—by
millions of gods, demons, and men combined. (Barker and
Chin, 77-78)
The Ascended Masters are portrayed as cosmic fathers who
will take care of their followers’ problems. In contrast,
Mahatma M. said: “ We are leaders but not child-nurses”
(Eek, 605). The adepts are impersonal, universal forces,
and respond only to those who are developing in that direction:
Although the whole of humanity is within the mental
vision of the mahatmas, they cannot be expected to take
special note of every human being, unless that being by
his special acts draws their particular attention to himself.
The highest interest of humanity, as a whole, is their
special concern, for they have identified themselves with
that Universal Soul which runs through Humanity, and he,
who would draw their attention, must do so through that
Soul which pervades everywhere. (Blavatsky, Collected
Writings, 6:240)
The Mahatmas do not communicate indiscriminately with people
who fail to realize the illusion of the personal self, or
who are driven by desires, fears, and ambitions:
They work on this plane through two kinds of agents:
direct and indirect. Any person sincere and unselfish
working in the line of the Masters’ work may receive
their inspiration even if they do not know it. Their direct
agents are their accepted disciples, who work consciously
with the Masters. (Codd, [2000], 9)
Their influence is always available for those of us acting
with selflessness and compassion, even though we may be
completely unaware of this. As K.H. wrote to Annie Besant:
“At favorable times we let loose elevating influences
which strike various persons in various ways” (Jinarajadasa
[1988], 1:123-24). Thus any philanthropic act we perform
may be part of the Mahatmas’ work. However, only accepted
disciples have a conscious and personal relationship with
them. The moral and spiritual qualifications needed to be
an accepted disciple are very deep and demanding, and very
few in humanity are at the level of spiritual maturity to
achieve this. (For a description of these qualifications
see At the Feet of the Master and Light on the
Path.)
The teachings of the Mahatmas are calculated to help people
rise above the personal ego and realize the spiritual Self.
Approaches like those we see in the New Age have been characterized
by the Tibetan lama Chögyam Trungpa as “spiritual
materialism.” While not denying the reality of the
spiritual, these individuals attempt to put it at the service
of the personal and material. This approach is appealing
for many who are not ready to try to transcend the personal
ego, and has turned the New Age into an important business.
Who Are the Ascended Masters?
Who, then, are these Ascended Masters that are communicating
with thousands of channels around the world? We cannot be
sure. But to appreciate this question it is necessary to
realize that the inner planes are inhabited by all kinds
of entities (elementals, thought-forms, deceased people,
living people whose bodies are sleeping, etc.). Many of
these entities enjoy impersonating Masters, saints, and
other important historical figures. (For more on this subject
see The Astral Plane and the pamphlet Difficulties
in Clairvoyance, both by Charles W. Leadbeater.)
Even in the early days of the TS, mediums and sensitives
began to channel messages from fake Mahatmas. For example,
after a sensitive by the name of Oxley declared that K.H.
had “thrice visited him ‘by the astral form’
and . . . that he had a conversation with Mr. Oxley,”
the Mahatma had to ask his disciple, Djual Kool, to write
to Mr. Sinnett saying: “Whomsoever Mr. Oxley may have
seen and conversed with at the time described, it was not
with Koot Hoomi” (Barker and Chin, 253).
In another instance, there was a medium who claimed to
be in touch with characters such as Jesus, John the Baptist,
Hermes, and Elijah. In a letter to Mr. Sinnett referring
to this kind of psychic communication, K.H. wrote: “Mystery,
mystery will you exclaim. ignorance we answer; the creation
of that we believe in and want to see” (Barker and
Chin, 109).
We have to keep in mind that “the Psychic World of
super-sensuous perceptions and of deceptive sights—the
world of Mediums . . . is the world of the Great Illusion”
(Blavatsky, [1992], 75-76). In that realm different entities
can assume any form according to what they find in the seer’s
mind. Deep powers of clairvoyance, long training, and a
strong spiritual maturity, are needed not to be fooled by
these entities, because
The slightest wish-fulfillment there [on the psychic
plane] takes shape and form. Such a thought-form can be
ensouled by a Nature-spirit . . . and thus appear as an
angel of light, telling us just what we want to hear.
CWL [i.e., Leadbeater] always warned us to be wary of
any vision or voice which flattered us. (Codd,
[1988], 66)
In support of this, Blavatsky offers a suggestive historical
fact. Writing in 1889, she observes:
Fourteen years ago, before the Theosophical Society
was founded, all the talk [by mediums] was of “Spirits”
. . . and no one by any chance even dreamt of talking
about living “Adepts,” “Mahatmas,”
or “Masters.” . . . Now all that is changed.
We Theosophists were, unfortunately, the first to talk
of these things . . . and now the name has become common
property. . . .
There is hardly a medium who has not claimed to have seen
them. Every bogus swindling Society, for commercial purposes,
now claims to be guided and directed by “Masters,”
often supposed to be far higher than ours! (Blavatsky
[1987], 301-302)
The idea of the Ascended Masters is hard to believe for
many spiritually minded people, who see in them nothing
more than a reemergence of the tribal gods of old. Let us
hope this article serves to remove some misconceptions.
References
Barker, A. T., and Vicente Hao Chin Jr., eds. The Mahatma
Letters to A.P. Sinnett from the Mahatmas M. and K. H. in
Chronological Sequence. Adyar: Theosophical Publishing
House, 1998.
Besant, Annie. The Masters. Adyar: Theosophical
Publishing House, 1985.
Blavatsky, H. P. Collected Writings. 15 vols. Wheaton:
Theosophical Publishing House, 1977-91.
——. The Key to Theosophy. London: Theosophical
Publishing House, 1987.
——. The Voice of the Silence. Wheaton:
Theosophical Publishing House, 1992.
Codd, Clara. The Way of the Disciple. Adyar: Theosophical
Publishing House, 1988.
——. Theosophy as the Masters See It. Adyar:
Theosophical Publishing House, 2000.
Eek, Sven, ed. Damodar and the Pioneers of the Theosophical
Movement. Adyar: Theosophical Publishing House, 1965.
Hanegraaff, Wouter J., et al. Dictionary of Gnosis and
Western Esotericism. Two volumes. Leiden: Brill, 2005.
Jinarajadasa, C. Early Teachings of the Masters.
Chicago: Theosophical Press, 1923.
——. Letters from the Masters of Wisdom.
Two volumes. Adyar: Theosophical Publishing House, 1988,
2002.
Source
Quest: Journal of the Theosophical Society in America
99/3 (Summer 2011): 107-111 & 120. Published on Alpheus
with the permission of the author.
Letters to the editor
Responses by Paula Kehoe and Govert
Schuller to the above article were submitted to and
published by Quest.
|
