The Magister 3

by Marcus Katz

  The Masters are here arranged as some university, with a similar hierarchy and organisation of mentoring and presentation for examination. The Master and the Adept are interchangeable terms, for the sponsoring agent between the initiate and the Brotherhood. However, the most pertinent comment on the role of the Masters is when Leadbeater points out that ‘Oriental’ material refers very little to Masters, as though none existed. In answering his own question, he asks that without the Masters:

  How is a man living in the ordinary world brought to this Probationary Path, and how does he come to know that such a thing exists?[68]

  It is as an indication of the esoteric tradition and its relevance to the development of man that the Masters function; as exemplars of the evolutionary concerns of esotericism and embodiments of an other-wise occult teaching.

  It is also noted that many contemporary esoteric movements hold the concept of the Masters, hence supporting the present proposal that this element is indeed intrinsic to the esoteric milieu. New Age authors, equally voluminous in their writings as Blavatsky, include Jane Roberts (Seth), J.Z. Knight (Ramtha), Elizabeth Clare Prophet and revealed writings such as A Course In Miracles (Helen Schucman), The Celestine Prophecy (James Redfield), Mutant Message Down Under (Marlo Morgan), and more recently, Conversations with God (Neale Donald Walsch),[69] all referring to one or more Masters.

  These masters are identified in a bewildering range of types, including, as found by Hanegraaf, “the Committee” described as “a geometrical consciousness comprised of a line, a spiral and a multi-dimensional triangle!”[70]

  There are a number of presuppositions embedded within theosophy which support the concept of the Masters, and which indeed would lead to their inevitable conceptualisation if the ideas are developed. These are evolution, reincarnation and multiple planes of existence. In theosophy, and in particular the identity of the Masters, we find a greater weight on one of the ‘relative’ conditions of the six (four primary, two relative) conditions denoted by Faivre as identifying the esoteric tradition – that of transmission.[71]

  In the primary component of imagination and mediation, in theosophy we also see the “accent is placed on vision and certainty, rather than on belief and faith.”[72]

  The Secret Doctrine of Madame Blavatsky makes clear that the context in which the Masters are to be seen is truly esoteric – in accord with Faivre’s components – in that:

  The whole Kosmos is guided, controlled, and animated by almost endless series of Hierarchies of sentient Beings, each having a mission to perform ... They vary infinitely in their respective degrees of consciousness and intelligence ...[73]

  The universe as a living and connected entity, with mediated degrees of existence, is one which will support the concept of Adepts who can navigate this universe.

  We must also account for the concept of karma in this vision of the Secret Masters. Karma is defined by Blavatsky as “the Ultimate Law of the Universe, the source, origin and fount of all other laws which exist throughout Nature.” More importantly, she deepens this concept by noting that karma is “that unseen and unknown law which adjusts wisely, intelligently and equitably each effect to its cause, tracing the latter back to its producer.”[74]

  Karma is thus seen as the law of evolution, in which the hierarchies are seated and “what is called ‘unconscious nature’ is in reality an aggregate of forces manipulated by semi-intelligent beings (Elementals) guided by High Planetary Spirits (Dhyani-Chohans), whose collective aggregate forms the manifested verbum of the unmanifested LOGOS ...”[75]

  Here Blavatsky again addresses a key component of esotericism defined by Faivre – that of a mediated universe, in which the Masters, as man, have a place.

  Blavatsky wrote that to see a real Mahatma, one must use “spiritual sight” and elevate the manas – the mind – “that its perception will be clear and all mists created by Maya [illusion] must be dispelled.” However, following that elevation, it is apparent that the Mahatmas are then to be considered as “ubiquitous and omnipresent” and the viewer will “see the Mahatmas wherever he may be.” This does not indicate a verifiable opportunity for one not versed in merging into the “sixth and seventh principles” to attain.[76]

  It is more in the relationship between the Master and the chela (pupil) that a new identity emerges; one based upon perception and communication, not verifiable externalisation. The Masters communicate through the pupil: “We employ agents – the best available,” says Master K.H. in a letter to H.S. Olcott, referring no doubt to Blavatsky.

  This relationship is not verifiable and not predictable, even to the chosen agents:

  Our ways are not your ways. We rarely show any outward signs by which to be recognised or sensed.[77]

  And furthermore;

  ‘Sermons may be preached through stones’. Do not be too eager for ‘instructions’.[78]

  Not only are perceptions of the Masters open to question and unverifiable, their own perception is given as uniquely placed:

  The Mahatmas are persistent in asserting that they are not infallible, that they are men, like the rest of us, perhaps with a somewhat more enlarged comprehension of nature than the generality of mankind, but still able to err both in the direction of practical business with which they may be concerned, and in their estimate of the characters of other men, or the capacity of candidates for occult development.[79]

  The communication and relationship between the individual and the Master is equally unique. The disciple is seen in some senses as merely “the extension of the Master’s nervous system.”[80] The Master “outlines the work; the disciple is left free to decide within his own limits how his share of it should best be carried out.”[81]

  In this context, it is not surprising that there is difficulty in formally identifying what is at once a human personage, an Adept whose own body has a double, an astral form, a transcended being, a form of communication, and an omnipresent existence.

  So can we identify such a Master? There are few other areas of the Western esoteric tradition that make so clear the line between esoteric articles of faith and academic epistemologies than the concept of Hidden Masters. Indeed, of this, Godwin suggests that here the “scholarly investigator [is] doomed to frustration.”[82]

  Blavatsky herself was less than forthright in her identification of her Master as a physical personage. In a letter to her aunt, reported by Jean Overton-Fuller, she says that she has “known” her Master for about 26 years, having first met him in London in 1851, in the train of the “premier of Nepaul” and later with the “Queen of Oudh.” Further background was given:

  He is a Buddhist, but not of the dogmatic Church, but belonging to Shivabhavika, the Nepaul so-called Aetheists (?!!!) …

  He who could be on the throne, according to the rights of birth, renounced all, to live quite unknown, and gave all his enormous income to the poor.[83]

  The first external attempt to establish the veracity and identity of the Masters came from the Society for Psychical Research (SPR) investigation into the phenomena associated with the Theosophical Society in 1884, which led to a second investigation following claims of fraud (made by Emma and Alex Coulomb). The report of the second investigation, known as the Hodgson Report, published on 24 June 1885, concluded that the Coulomb’s accusations were true: the letters supposedly written by the Mahatmas Koot Hoomi Lal Sing and Morya had in fact been written by either Blavatsky or her theosophical assistant and disciple, Damodar K. Mavalankar. Furthermore, the Mahatmas were “mere fictions.”[84] However, this research has been questioned, with an alternative conclusion that there was no evidence that the Mahatma letters were fabricated.[85]

  Other authors have sought to establish the identity of the Masters and “move from the mythical to the historical.” One controversial study is that presented by K. Paul Johnson, who profiles 32 of the “hidden sponsors” of Blavatsky, seeking to identify the Masters as historical personages. Master K.H. is identified as Thakar Singh
Sandhanwalia, and Master Morya is identified as Maharaja Kanbir Singh of Kashmir.[86] The physicality of the Masters is also another contentious area. In 1882, Olcott himself wrote to the Spiritualist magazine in response to this question:

  I have seen them, not once but numerous times. I have talked to them. I was not entranced, nor mediumistic, nor hallucinated, but always in my sober senses. I have corresponded with them, receiving their letters ... I have seen them, both in their bodies and their doubles, usually the latter ... Since November last, four different Brothers have made themselves visible to visitors at our headquarters.

  I know the Brothers to be living men and not Spirits; and they have told me that there are schools, under appointed living adepts, where their Occult science is regularly taught.[87]

  As men – even transcended – the politics of the Masters is a deeper question outside the scope of this current work, but it could be suggested that the Masters provide a bridge between occult speculation and practical politics. Fritz Kunz talks of:

  ... the state of a man who is independent, original and simple, with regard to his duty to society, not only as an isolated individual with a unique experience, but as a person with a high social sense, such as the Masters are [my bold]. Unquestionably, such a man would believe in a greater democracy, one with forms unknown to us today except by such meaningless terms as Socialism, Communism — or even an anarchy, in which every individual is a law unto himself, because he knows the eternal laws, and therefore lives at a better and much more useful level in society than could a man of good intention who is without a knowledge of nature’s laws.[88]

  Ultimately, the Masters state their own reason for existence and their cause. The Master K.H. writes:

  The cause I live for, that Battle of Light against Darkness.[89]

  In fact, Blavatsky indicates, in a statement not often quoted, that in the final analysis, there are two Masters: God and the Devil.[90] In this we see that the Masters provide a fundamental conceptual placeholder for the theosophical tradition, as agents representing the positive side of a dualistic world-view.

  In the identification of the Masters by their role and function, rather than their physical identity, we can see that the Masters function as a template in which the theosophist can contextualise their own personal spiritual evolution:

  I can come nearer to you, but you must draw me by a purified heart and a gradually developing will.[91]

  The Master provides a confidante and mentor to the aspiring student in the absence of the love of a Christ-figure:

  The Master is our friend and co-worker, or rather – we can be His, each in his own sphere, and according to our best judgement.[92]

  They transcend our own limitations; they are “able to see far into the future and see in an individual more of his potentialities than his present capacities.”[93]

  This function provides encouragement to those following the disciplines of the school, including the practice of right living and meditation. Furthermore, the Masters provide an overarching sentience to the events of the world, in the absence of a singular controlling deity:

  We claim to know more of the secret cause of events than you men of the world do.[94]

  It is in this representation of the secret cause of events – the very occult heart of the universe – that the Masters provide their deepest function, as mediators between the world of the apparent and the world of divine wisdom; theo-sophia:

  Buddhism, stripped of its superstitions, is eternal truth, and he who strives for the latter is striving for theo-sophia, Divine Wisdom, which is a synonym of truth.[95]

  It has not been possible here to begin to examine a number of related issues to that singular question posed; that is to say, not only who are the Masters, but why are they generally identified as male, what are the mechanisms by which they perform transmutation of the world in order to communicate across space, and how is their transcendence of time to be explained? To these issues we will return in Volume 9 of The Magister.

  The identity of the Masters, it has been proposed, is not as relevant a question as to their role – their necessary function as exemplars and conceptual placeholders within the context of the WEIS, as evinced within the theosophy movement.

  As Kunz states, the obstacle to the emergence (or identification) of the Masters is “whether we are trying to make a world suitable to them,”[96] and this is the stumbling block of which Godwin writes to the academic approach.

  The concept itself requires what Blavatsky terms “that enlightened belief,” faith, leading to knowledge, which is experience, and that – as we have concluded – is itself the prompt to “work in harmonious accord with Nature, instead of going against its purposes through ignorance.”[97] It was in the early part of what is now the previous century that these Masters wrote to Laura C. Holloway and warned that mankind was:

  drifting into two classes ... one preparing for long periods of temporary annihilation or states of non-consciousness (through bigotry or superstition), the other unrestrainingly indulging its animal propensities with the deliberate intention of submitting to annihilation pure and simple.

  In the face of that constant threat, the path of all human evolution into a state of mastery remains a relevant and compelling article of esoteric faith.

  No Man Hath Seen me Unveiled

  In this section we will look at the experience of the Dweller on the Threshold and begin to explore the magical constitution of the Self in relation to the universe, through the Ancient Egyptian schema and the kabbalah. This introduces the idea that the Self is experiencing a re-organisation in relation to the universe throughout the initiatory system, and as it does, various difficulties will be encountered. These may manifest in a variety of ways – self-delusion, boredom, pride, attraction to esoteric powers and experiences, and much more. The primary experience is that of the Dweller on the Threshold, which in effect is a standard entry into every initiatory grade which follows, not just the first on our occult progress. After a while one welcomes the Dweller as a signpost, rather than rejecting it as a terrifying evil presence.

  The nature of events surrounding the initiatory work are extremely variable. However, there are usually effects both internal and external, so I will attempt to give a couple of examples. In one, a student found that they were suddenly experiencing waves of ‘insecurity’ about their personal situation/s and wanted to leave the Work in order to ‘deal with the situation’. It was not to be made easily clear to them that the ‘situation’ was the Work. Their ‘insecurity’ resulted from a growing knowledge and experience that they didn’t know themselves as well as they thought, so therefore this was also projected out onto those close to them.

  Another student found that they were experiencing a run of ‘bad luck’ which resulted in them ‘quitting’ the apprenticeship scheme in order to ‘get back to a normal life and come back later’. They couldn’t be convinced that this was part of their Work and they were unlikely to come back later or, if they did, that the same thing would probably happen again. They have not come back.

  These experiences are part of the ‘Dweller on the Threshold’ syndrome, which I best describe in a chemistry analogy.

  If you measure the temperature of water as it is heated, by the second, you get a steadily rising graph with a gentle curve. However, as the water approaches boiling point (100 degrees Celsius), at about 97-98 degrees Celsius, the graph suddenly dips slightly, as if the water isn’t heating up uniformly, but doing ‘something else’. The temperature then – after this briefest of blips – returns to rising steadily to 100 degrees Celsius, when it starts to boil and the water turns from liquid to gas. This ‘blip’ is caused by the water molecules, bonded atoms of hydrogen and oxygen, ‘stealing’ the heat energy in order to ‘break’ the bonds holding them in a liquid form, which turns them into a gaseous form. It is not a steady rise – there is an initiatory moment prior to the state-change.

  That ‘blip’ seems to me a wonderful
model of what happens to a life when it is about to undergo a state-change; and the magical faith is that it happens both internally and externally, with seemingly no apparent causality that can be measured, predicted or discerned.

  With regard to the Dweller on the Threshold, and other such matters, then ‘terror’ is often seen as your only chosen response (whether you like it or not!), but it is not something that is implicit in the experience itself. There is a line in Jacob’s Ladder, a film which I show my students at some point or another if they have not already seen it, where a character paraphrases a mystical saying, “If you’re holding on, then angels seem like demons, tearing your life away, but if you let go, you’ll see them as angels, freeing you.” It is very true. Heart-breakingly so.

  Each grade has its Dweller experience, appropriate to the nature of the sephirah to which it maps. At the grade of Adeptus Exemptus, corresponding to Chesed, ‘mercy’, one such experience was a terrifying lucid dream of such vehemence and power that it flung the initiate off the path for more than a year. The dreamer was placed in a blue cube, composed of a living water. A sound commenced, which he knew was of the ‘engines of undoing’. The water upon the walls started to create vast ripples and patterns of increasing complexity and speed, as his very soul became unravelled. He glanced across the room to see another figure – possibly himself – tearing out their own eyes as they could not endure the process. It may be that the Dweller is often ourselves, but this helps us not at all to know.