[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Theos-World Re: The Coming Teacher?

Feb 27, 2008 11:26 PM
by Frank Reitemeyer


Perhaps it's our usage of English, which is making
our concepts difficult to understand each other's
position, because what you have written above is
not what I have said.

Indeed, I need to improve my English.
Your answer shows me the (my?) misunderstandings.


Please simply state what you believe to be your


I never believed to have an evidence.
So I kindly asked you, what would you accept as evidence?
So perhaps I can give you this evidence.
What is your evidence, say, that Masters really exist?


My perspective remains, until proven otherwise,
that whilst Madame Blavatsky wrote about the
potential for coming teachers, she always couched
it in terms of "if" such as, "And if her place is
even filled up, perchance by another worthier and
more learned than herself, still there remain but
a few years to the last hour of the term -- namely,
till December the 31st, 1899."
"First Preliminary Memorandum" issued Madame
Blavatsky in 1888 to the members of the E.S.

Here she clearly wasn't speaking in terms of a
fait accompli despite what other commentators might
assume and write with such authority.
In previous posts I have provided other examples of
quotes from Madame Blavatsky supporting this contention.

Even Dr Purucker writes, "As she herself points out
in substance: someone will follow me in all likelihood."

Even from him, note his qualifiers, "in substance"
thereby not referring to a direct quote. And, "in
all likelihood". Once again, not conclusively


I again do not understand what your problem is.
What do you mean by "even Dr Purucker writes", as if it is something 
strange, what he said.
It's the most logic thing he said.

HPB came to do certain work.
But the success, or the degree of success, depended on the growth of the 
souls of her co-workers.
So no conclusively predictive was possible, at least publicly, because for 
every soul there are always two paths and HPB had no right to suppress the 
free will.


We can hide behind the veil of esotericism as
our presumed authority, but this runs the real
and actual risk of people assuming that HPB
stated that a master would definitely appear
before 1899 and again in 1975.


To me it's quite the other way round:
esotericism is the only real world of which I know of.
HPB never stated that a master would definitely appear before 1899, because 
it depended of the karma of her co-workers.
Were all her chelas fallen like Annie Besant, no Master would have appeared 
before 1899.
But not all her chelas were fallen, several stood the test, like Henry T. 
Edge (for example).
But that does not mean that she did not work towards this possibility and 
was merely in a wait and see position.

In 1888 or 1889 she asked her closest co-worker William Judge, whether he 
has found his new chela or not.
Judge also confirms that he several times has discussed with (the then still 
incarnated) HPB about the new hope, the new paraclete and that she knew that 
this new chela would build in teh West a theosophical school as so fulfill 
HPB's highest dreams, a task, which she was handicapped to fulfill.

But if the situation had taken place, that all her chelas went away or 
became untrue, no paraclete would have appeared and no school had build.
And "they" had to wait until 1975, because in every last quarter of a 
century a messenger of the Masters appears in the West since Tsong-kha-pa.
I call it the outer messengers in analogy to outer rounds.


This thereby creates the potential for messianic
mindset and preparation such as occurred from some
of the "later messengers" including Bishop Leadbeater
and Dr Besant of the Theosophical Society, Adyar.

Messianic mindset and preparation, or preparation of
any kind, produces blind followers and devotees, and
creates the potential for authority figures who claim
to "know."


True, but that obviously did not prevent the Masters to send one of theirs 
to the West in the last quarter.
And again, I think that Adyar has learned its lesson on cant about Masters.
So the result is that most theosophists did not recognize around 1975 the 
new torchbearer of truth.

That many false messiahs come does not mean that not also a true messiah 
comes, don't?


>From my perspective, we need be particularly careful to clearly
distinguish between the ongoing work and manifestations of the
masters of the wisdom, which they themselves verify, and setting any
actual predictive dates of their putative physical appearance in
human form.


Ongoing work... a good idea.
Most leading theosophist in Middle Europe I know of believe that all 
theosophical work was already done by HPB and we may rest now (they will 
rest for themselves, they will not HPB's rest).

I never heard of any pukka theosophist giving predictive dates about 
What do you mean by appearance in human form?

Do they usually appear in animal form?

Also from my perspective, we need be particularly careful not to put
words into the mouth of Madame Blavatsky, which she didn't actually
She did not write that there would be appearances, only that there
may be, either before, or not before a particular date, and even then
subject to particular criteria.


--- In, "Frank Reitemeyer" <dzyan@...>
> Nigel wrote:
> --------------------------------
> Dear Frank
> Thank you again for your response.
> You write, "I don't get your point.
> What makes you so sure to know what HPB has planed
> in 1875?"
> Actually I have not been shown conclusive evidence
> that she planned anything at all in terms of
> preparing, ".the world for the coming of a great
> spiritual teacher expected in the last quarter of
> the 20th century in 1975" for reasons already stated.
> She carried out the work intended for her and suggested
> the above may occur subject to criteria already stated.
> --------------------------------
> Frank:
> Dear Nigel,
> me thought, you were quiet sure that HPB had no plans in 1875 for
> work of successive messengers.
> --------------------------------
> Nigel wrote:
> You write, "when HPB wrote about him in 1888, he was
> already there."
> Can you please supply credible evidence to support
> this contention?
> --------------------------------
> Frank:
> Possibly. That depends on some conditions.
> I need to now, what you would accept as evidence.
> Also I need to know whether you accept the occult office of a
messenger to
> the Masters.
> We are talking here about esoteric matters and thinks are difficult.
> --------------------------------
> Nigel wrote:
> You write, "HPB used the term "send", which is a
> flexible term and a blind, too. She says here that
> the karmic ring or connection between her and her
> successor is done and it depends of the karma of
> the theosophists and TS, whether the new teacher
> is "send" or made known."
> Can you also please supply credible evidence to support
> these contentions?
> --------------------------------
> Frank:
> Perhaps Purucker's hints about the insignia majestatis will be of
> --------------------------------
> Nigel wrote:
> You write, "That he intermixes the occult status
> and titles of the persons mentioned is also clear.
> That people have wrong pictures in mind is not the
> fault of HPB. Therefore she was careful with her
> statements, so much, that she is not understood,
> except perhaps by those, who it may concern."
> Once again can you kindly provide credible evidence
> for this?
> --------------------------------
> Frank:
> It's self-evident. HPB's discussion of the work of a messenger of
1897 and
> the work of the 1975 messenger are logically two different things.
> I don't know what is so difficult to understand.
> --------------------------------
> Nigel wrote:
> Frank with respect, you write with quite adamant
> authority. You often claim that some of us have
> wrong perspectives whilst providing little hard
> evidence of a credible nature to me to support
> your contentions. I hope you might be able to do
> so on this occasion.
> --------------------------------
> Frank:
> Really!!??
> Perhaps I need to brush up my English.
> I just share with all open-minded students the results of my study.
> These results are personal opinion.
> You or Morten or others have other opinions.
> If I think, they are wrong, I speak out.
> You have given me also no hard evidence that HPB did not work for
> succeccors and the 1975 messenger.
> And I wonder which evidence I could give you, while the living and
the work
> of our great ones speaks for themselves.
> Should I send you a certificate, singed by a President of a TS, in
which is
> stated: "Yes, Frank is right, HPB did prepatory work for the 1975
> And yes, Frank is also right, that the 1897 messenger is not
identical with
> the 1975 messenger?"



[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application