Jesus, Re: Election results
Jul 03, 2008 09:05 AM
2008/7/2 Konstantin Zaitzev <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> Surely she acknowledged existence of historical Jesus, who was
> nevertheless a somewhat different person from that which was
> by the church myth.
> See an article by David Pratt with a good collection of quotations
> from HPB & other sources:
The David Pratt article is very interesting. Thank you. Madame
Blavatsky wrote an answer to this in the Theosophist of 1883. On a
quick first reading, I did not see that David Pratt refers to this
article. Her article does suggest she and the Mahatmas recognised a
historical Jesus but did not recognise this Jesus in the Christ of
the Gospels. See below.
FOOTNOTES TO "THE STATUS OF JESUS"
[The Theosophist, Vol. IV, No. 10, July, 1883, p. 261]
[In a communication on "The Status of Jesus" a correspondent
writes: "The long procession of martyrs who died for the love of
Jesus is unknown in the history of Buddhism"; and asks: "What is the
exact position given to Jesus, by the Mahatmas, in the sacred order
of adepts? departed from the earth? . . . Would Jesus now be
termed . . . a Dhyan Chohan, a Buddha, or a Planetary Spirit? And is
he now . . . interested or concerned at all with the progress of
humanity on Earth?" H. P. B. replies:]
"There is often greater martyrdom to live for the love of, whether
man or an ideal, than to die for it" is a motto of the Mahatmas.
The position THEY give to Jesus, as far as we know, is that of a
great and pure man, a reformer who would fain have lived but who had
to die for that which he regarded as the greatest birthright of man?
absolute Liberty of conscience; of an adept who preached a universal
Religion knowing of, and having no other "temple of God" but man
himself; that of a noble Teacher of esoteric truths which he had no
time given to him to explain; that, of an initiate who recognized no
difference?save the moral one?between men; who rejected caste, and
despised wealth; and who preferred death rather than to reveal the
secrets of initiation. And who, finally, lived over a century before
the year [one] of our vulgar, so called, Christian era.
We do not know which of the Buddhas our correspondent is thinking of,
for there were many "Buddhas." They recognize in him one of
the "Enlightened," hence in this sense a Buddha; but they do not
recognize Jesus at all in the Christ of the Gospels. . . . .
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application