WHAT WERE THEY THE MASTERS OF ? PART II

[Guest guest]

WHAT WERE THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY MASTERS THE MASTERS OF ?

 

PART 2

 

 

 

by H H TRIDANDI SANNYASI BHAKTI ANANDA GOSWAMI MAHARAJA , SHIKSHA

(INSTRUCTING) MASTER, BRAHMA-MADHVA-GAUDIYA LINEAGE OF VAISHNAVISM

 

SEE PART I...

 

THEOSOPHICAL PROPOSITIONS

 

1. THE ONLY TRUE PHILOSOPHY OF THE EARTH, THEOSOPHY IDENTIFIED AS

BUDDHISM, IS FOUND IN THE MAHATMAS' LETTERS, AND THESE LETTERS ARE

THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF ESOTERIC / OCCULT OR HIGHER WISDOM FOR

THEOSOPHISTS. NEXT TO THESE LETTERS, THE "STANZAS OF DYZAN" ARE OF

CANONICAL IMPORTANCE TO THEOSOPHISTS.

 

2. THE THEOSOPHICAL MASTERS, AUTHORS OF THE 'MAHATMA LETTERS',

ESPECIALLY KOOT HOOMI, MASTER MORYA AND SERAPIS, ARE THE HIGHEST

AUTHORITIES WHO HAVE REVEALED THEMSELVES TO HUMANITY.

 

3. THE MASTER OF THE MASTERS KOOT HOOMI AND MORYA, IS SERAPIS.

 

4. H.P, BLAVATSKY IS THE RATHER HIDDEN INCARNATION OF SERAPIS.

 

5.THE BROTHERHOOD OF THEOSOPHICAL MASTERS HAS REINCARNATED THROUGHOUT

TIME, GUIDING THE WORLD ( AND EVOLUTION OF THE RACES). THUS ALL

PREVIOUS REVELATIONS, RELIGIONS AND ADVANCES IN VARIOUS FIELDS, MUST

BE INTERPRETED IN THE CONTEXT OF THEIR SUPPOSED RELATIONSHIP TO THE T

S MASTERS.

 

6. THE PRIESTS OF DOGMATIC OR DOCTRINAL ORGANIZED RELIGIONS HAVE

CORRUPTED THEIR SCRIPTURES, SO IT IS BETTER TO READ THE MORE

AUTHENTIC CORE OF TEACHINGS CONTAINED IN THE "STANZAS OF DYZAN" AND

THE SYNTHESIZED TEACHINGS OF THE MAHATMAS AND HPB. THERE IS NO NEED

TO LEARN LANGUAGES AND STUDY THE SOURCE WORKS THEMSELVES, AS HPB HAS

PROVIDED A CLEAR AND ACCURATE SYNTHESIS OF EVERYTHING IN THESE THAT

IS SIGNIFICANT TO STUDY.

 

7. SANNYASIS AND SADHUS ETC. ARE "ON THE PATH OF ERROR", AND

THEOSOPHY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SHASTRA OF BRAHMINISM.

 

8. KOOT HOOMI / THEOSOPHY ABSOLUTELY DENIES THE EXISTENCE OF GOD OR

GODS.

 

9, THERE IS AN AMALGAMATION OF MAHAYANA AND THERAVADIN BUDDHISM WITH

ADVAITA VEDANTISM AND VAISHNAVA SOURCES IN THE TEACHINGS OF

THEOSOPHICAL 'BUDDHISM'.

 

10. MADAME BLAVATSKY WAS A VERY INTELLECTUALLY GIFTED AND EDUCATED

PERSON, WHO WAS THE CENTRAL FIGURE IN THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT OF

THEOSOPHY. WHETHER OR NOT SHE WROTE THE MAHATMA LETTERS WITH THE

HELP OF CORPOREAL OR INCORPOREAL BEINGS, MAY OR MAY NOT BE OF

IMPORTANCE IN CERTAIN KINDS OF ANALYSIS OF THE LETTERS. THE ACTUAL

CONTENT OF THE LETTERS CAN BE EXAMINED IN RELATIONSHIP TO REAL-WORLD

ANCIENT TEXTUAL AND LIVING TRADITIONS, TO SEE IF THE MAHATMAS'

PRESENTATIONS ARE ACCURATE WITH REGARD TO THOSE THOUGHT-SYSTEMS.

 

LET US NOW CONSIDER SOME OF THE CURIOUS FACTS RELATED TO THE SPECIFIC

MIXTURE OF EASTERN AND WESTERN TEACHINGS IN THE MAHATMA LETTERS.

 

In one letter KH writes to Sinnett:

...."Our best, most learned. and highest adepts are of the races of

the 'greasy Tibetans'; and the Penjabi Singhs -- ..."...

 

"Daniel H. Caldwell"

Sat Nov 16, 2002 2:12 pm

A Question for Brian about one of his statements

 

 

 

 

Concerning Master KH, Mr. Sinnett said in THE OCCULT WORLD (first

published June 1881):

 

"My correspondent is known to me as the Mahatma Koot Hoomi. This is

his 'Tibetan Mystic name' - occultists, it would seem, taking new

names on initiation. . . ."

 

Mr. Sinnett also writes in the same work that Koot Hoomi was:

 

". . . a native of the Punjab who was attracted to occult studies

from his earliest boyhood. He was sent to Europe while still a youth

at the intervention of a relative - himself an occultist - to be

educated in Western knowledge, and since then has been fully

initiated in the greater knowledge of the East."

 

H.P. Blavatsky in 1884 wrote in LIGHT magazine:

 

". . . the Master [Koot Hoomi] is a Punjabi, whose family was settled

for years in Cashmere."

 

....

 

"There are a number of primary source documents which show that K.H.

was known as "Cashmere" ("Kashmir" or other variant spellings)

especially during the years 1875-1878 when H.P.B. and Olcott were

living in New York City."

 

"Daniel H. Caldwell"

Sat Nov 16, 2002 12:03 pm

Coleman wrote: "he (K.H.) was known in America as `The

Kashmiri Brother.'"

 

 

What were the Theosophical Society Masters the masters of ? Most of

the debates that I have seen regarding the T.S. Masters have focused

on the Masters' identity, the 'precipitation' of their letters, H.P.

Blavatsky's or someone else's medium-ship or 'channeling' of their

thoughts / writings, textual analysis of their letters for

contemporary or near-contemporary plagiarized material, stylistic

elements, language or other clues to their identity. In my planned

series of commentaries on the Mahatma Letters, I do not intend to

address any of these things, which have all been chewed before.

Rather than chewing-the-chewed, like a cow not done with its cud, I

want to provide a reading of the Letters from the perspective of a

person familiar with some of the source-works and traditions that the

Mahatmas used and / or claimed to be representing. Ideas and the

words, written and spoken, and images or symbols and actions that

convey them, have history. Innovations occur and get diffused.

Ideas spark social movements that wax and wane. Thought-forms, like

other 'things' have certain time-and-space limitations.

Communication is sent and received in specific forms and languages.

Each word or symbol has a content actually intended by its sender,

and any number of meanings imposed on it by receivers.

Scientifically-minded historians (not historical-fiction writers)

want to know what was actually meant by the creators or sender(s) of

a document from the past. They want to understand the successive

meanings giving to an original or earlier document by later

commentators. They want to peel-back the layers of time, and get at

the original core of an idea. Such scientifically-minded persons do

not want to impose meanings on history, they want to discover the

real meanings already there in history. They don't want to 'massage

the data' to fit into preconceived notions of history, or to support

an agenda of some kind. The real lover of truth wants to understand

what really happened, who the real players were, and what their

motives, means and actions were etc. Such investigators use

scientific methodologies and means of inquiry designed to safe-guard

the objectivity and integrity of their efforts. They try to avoid

errors by rigorously identifying their sources, to be sure of

authenticity.

 

In the case of my own studies, from the very beginning I learned of

the value of interdisciplinary research from my father (a research

electrobiophysicist), who taught me that errors could be avoided and

facts established beyond doubt by approaching a subject or question

from a multiplicity of disciplines instead of only one. Thus my

studies utilized every discipline that I could bring to bear on a

particular question. This has given me a well-rounded grasp of the

main subjects of my historical inquiries.

 

In the above quotes, the Master Koot Hoomi (K H) writes about the

Tibetans and Penjabi Singhs, Mr. Sinnet says that K H was a native

of the Punjab, H.P. Blavatsky says that Koot Hoomi is a Pujabi, and

both Blavatsky and others identify K H with Kashmir. I begin my

commentary on the Mahatma Letters with these references, because I

will be focusing quite a bit on the Vaishnava, Buddhist and related

content of the Letters. Tibetan Buddhism, Vaishnavism, Shaivism,

Devi worship, Sufism, Sikhism and all the branches of these

traditions have their own real world histories. For example, there

is a traditional date for the entrance of Padmasambhava into Tibet,

and thus an eighth century historical beginning to Tibetan

Buddhism. The Advaita Vedantism of Sri Adi Shankaracharya has a

history too, as does the successive waves of Ishmali and Sufi

Mohammedanism into the Punjab and Kashmir. In the Mahatma Letters

there is a curious mix of Atheistic and Theistic (Vaishnava) Advaita

Vedanta, Mahayana and Theravadin Buddhism, Sikh and Sufi

reinterpretations of Vaishnava, Shaivite and Devi teachings, and

other amalgamations which can be found ESPECIALLY in the region of

Kashmir. In Kashmir today for instance, there may be found

Vaishnava-influenced Muslim Sufi 'brahmins' who do not eat flesh,

Tantric-influenced Sahajiya Vaishnavas, various Sufi-Vaishnava or

Sufi-Vaishnava-Shaivite hybrid groups, and Sikhism, which as another

Sufi-Vaishnava-Shaivite hybrid religion is of course related to the

Vaishnava and Shaivite Kshatriyas (warrior class) of the Punjab.

Thus the name "Singh" is important in this connection.

 

Pure Land Buddhism, as originally in Nepal and Tibet, has its

historical origins in Vaishnavism, and so is connected to the strange

Kashmiri mix in the thread of Vaishnava doctrines and practices

running through the whole region. It is from this regional melting-

pot of Indic and Western (Sufi and Gnostic) traditions that the

Masters' K H and Morya seem to have acquired some of their unorthodox

understanding of the Sanskrit Shastras (scriptures) and to have

created their hodge-podge of an 'Eastern' thought system. Whoever

they were, they were masters of something, but what was that

something? To assess their competence as masters of eastern

traditions, one would need themself to be qualified in such

traditions. As an instructing master in the Vedic-based Tradition of

Vaishnavism, I am qualified to assess the accuracy of the what the

masters have presented from my own tradition. Since the oldest

literary traditions in the region are clearly those of the Sanskrit

Vaishnava-related texts, and the Masters refer to doctrines from

these texts, then it is reasonable to assess the Mahatmas'

presentation of ideas from these texts to determine their accuracy.

 

 

THE EXAMPLE OF THE RIG VEDA AND PROTO-MAHAYANA BUDDHISM

 

For example, the Rig Veda is by all estimations very much older than

the Advaita Vedantan writings of Adi Sankaracharya, the beginning of

Tibetan Buddhism (8th A D), the Era of Asoka or even the life of

Sakyamuni Buddha Himself. The Purusha Sukta Hymn is considered by

many scholars to be among the oldest surviving writings of humanity.

The Purusha Sukta is found in a collection of Vedic Sanskrit Hymns,

the Rig Veda. These hymns glorify God under a variety of Names and

Forms, as these forms have appeared from the Cosmic Body of the

universal self-sacrificed Purusha, Who is described in the Purusha

Sukta. In later corruptions of this monotheistic tradition, the

forms of Purusha, are demoted to a mere multiplicity of 'gods'. Thus

polytheism , pantheism etc. eventually obscured the originality and

supremacy of Purusha as the transcendent supreme Deity of the Rig

Veda. Purusha assumed a cosmic form for self-sacrifice to create,

sustain (as sacramental food / Prasadam) and redeem every world /

cosmic manifestation. In the Purusha Sukta, and related Vedic

texts, it is clearly understood that Purusha is VISHNU. The Purusha

Sukta is still chanted today on Vaishnava altars as the Eucharistic

PRASADAM offerings are being made. Another one of Vishnu's Vedic

names is Asura (from the root meaning 'being', 'to be, exist'). In

the "Dawn and Twilight of Zoroastrianism", R. C. Zaehner identifies

the cosmic Purusha with the Zoroastrian supreme Deity Ahura Mazda

(Ahura=Asura).

 

The Jagganatha or Universal Form of Vishnu as Purusha is sometimes

called his Vishva Rupa or Virata Rupa. This is one of the

theophanies of SRI KRISHNA that was revealed to Arjuna in the

Bhagavad-gita, The cosmic form of God in Jewish mysticism is

definitely related to the revelation of Sri Krishna in the Gita.

The universal Purusha is of course identified with the Purusha

AVATARA FORMS OF VISHNU. In the Vedas, Vishnu is called by many

names, including Asura and Purusha. It is Vishnu Who is worshiped in

multi-form in the Vedic hymns. This is the tradition of the oldest

stratum of Vedic so-called 'Hinduism', and all the principle Vedic

Nama-Rupa name-forms of Vishnu are found many centuries later in

Mahayana Buddhism, including Tibetan and related Nepalese Buddhism.

There the very ancient Vedic names and forms of Vishnu-Purusha AS

LOKSHEVARA, are connected to Vaishnava doctrines, rites, practices,

sacramental social order etc.. So the foundation of Tibetan

Buddhism is in the much earlier worship of Vishnu-Purusha, without

any doubt. When the entire socio-religious cultural milieu in which

Sakyamuni's Buddhism first developed was Vedic-Vaishnava, how is it

reasonable to assume that the pervasive elements of Vaishnavism in

Mahayana Buddhism are later, intrusions or corruptions ? In fact,

Mahayana Buddhism, including Tibetan Buddhism, uses the very Sanskrit

Names of Krishna-Vishnu for the ADI BUDDHA, who is also called ADI

PURUSHA, BHAGAVAN, PURUSOTAMMA etc. To claim that a younger

tradition (Buddhism) owes nothing to its origins is ridiculous. The

extremely ancient Purusha Sukta related Forms of Lokesvara are those

of Vishnu. The same names and forms are there in both the Buddhist

and Vaishnava traditions, and this is not peculiar to the Nepalese-

Tibetan form of Buddhism either. Everywhere in Pure Land Mahayana

Buddhism it is the same. The names, forms, doctrines, rites etc, of

the salvific other-power tradition of Buddhism are closely related to

those of Krishna-centric Vaishnavism. When we look at the Sanskrit

sources for the Mahatmas' 'Hindu' and 'Buddhist' ideas, again the

oldest of these are the Vaishnava and Vaishnava-related scriptures.

For those accustomed to thinking of Sanskrit literatures in terms of

some generic 'Hinduism', no such thing existed in the ancient world.

Scriptures were the testimony of specific traditions, such as the

sattvic Vaishnava or Shaivite or tantric Devi worshiping

traditions. In the "CULT OF TARA" by S. Beyer, the original

Sanskrit for the Tibetan Buddhist rituals of Mother Tara are given.

Any Vaishnava pujari priest would immediately recognize these

Sanskrit mantrams, hymns and rites ! So, if we are going to

seriously consider the claims of the Mahatmas to mastery in Tibetan

Buddhism, I want to see evidence in their Letters that they knew of,

and understood the close relationship between Tibetan Buddhism, and

my own much more ancient Vedic tradition of Vaishnavism.

 

END PART 2