The Unseen Masters

Astral and paranormal experiences, dreams and visions.
User avatar
Nefastos
Frater
Posts: 3482
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

The Unseen Masters

Postby Nefastos » Sat Mar 28, 2015 12:26 pm

The newest blog entry, bearing the same name with this thread, is about the so called secret chiefs or the unseen masters, and how these masters can be either of inner or outer kind, or both. (Or rather, they can be both inner & outer, or only inner, but not outside us only. I hope that the entry is clear in that.)

This is a question that can be almost irrelevant to most of even our own members. To some it most likely is even annoying, seeming much like the blind faith of both the exoteric religions and the most questionable New Age beliefs. As also said in the blog entry, such scepticism is encouraged. It both will & should remain as an article of faith and/or interest for the small minority. But because such a small minority is very close to the both practical & speculative heart of the brotherhood, it would be unscrupulous not to talk about it at all.

In this thread we can talk about the question of these unseen masters. Although the blog entry is quite long, I would like to ask people taking part to this conversation reading it before commenting.

Once again it was a bit problematic where to open this discussion. "Ideologies and Religions" might have been a better choice in a way, but I chose "Psychic Phenomena" because of its close connection to the magical world view which the unseen masters are part of.

Link to the blog entry: The Unseen Masters
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
User avatar
Kenazis
Frater
Posts: 969
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 7:57 pm
Location: Satakunta - Limbo

Re: The Unseen Masters

Postby Kenazis » Sat Mar 28, 2015 5:12 pm

Some thoughts after the reading: I don’t see Azazel, Lucifer, Christ etc. being Masters in same way as I see these ascended masters (like Morya). One difference is that for me Azazel never has been human like the ones like Morya etc. I see these archetypes like forces of cosmos that dwells within and without. Their personas are like bridge or gate between the man and the force.

“For the master is:
– One’s inner “higher self” (= the monadic unity of our âtma-buddhi-manas).
– An ascended human being who is known by a pseudonym or a title.
– A divinity, who is superconscious and omnipresent but without any human personality. “

So…for me it’s only the middle one that’s outside my current believe-system.
"In darkness let me dwell, The ground shall sorrow be..."
User avatar
Insanus
Frater
Posts: 929
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 7:06 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: The Unseen Masters

Postby Insanus » Sat Mar 28, 2015 6:42 pm

In prayer, I seek a contact with something beyond my waking mind. I know I'm successful if I feel my heart & mind are "one" or at least in a real communication under intention related to the archetype in question. Then I try to interpret that in my personal life, sticking to & trying to share whatever was good in that, using or trying to use the personal tools from a different standpoint.

That's what I understand as "communication with unseen masters".
I don't know if that's the pratyeka-way or not.
Myrkky sattuu siihen jolla on haava.
User avatar
Heith
Sodalis
Posts: 2509
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 12:54 pm

Re: The Unseen Masters

Postby Heith » Sat Apr 04, 2015 2:31 pm

I confess that I found the blog text a little bit difficult to follow at times. So feeling somewhat confused and fearing that I have not really understood the core of what you wrote, Nefastos, I will try and reply something.

This is a topic I felt was really important when it was first mentioned on another thread on the members' (finnish) forum. So I looked forward to hearing more about this. It does, however, feel to me that this is one of those things that when I try to read about it, my eyes begin to wander and very soon I feel a certain frustration- as this is something that would be easier for me were it explained with a picture. When I read the text I begin to sketch a kind of diagram or picture in my mind, especially when it comes to

“For the master is:
– One’s inner “higher self” (= the monadic unity of our âtma-buddhi-manas).
– An ascended human being who is known by a pseudonym or a title.
– A divinity, who is superconscious and omnipresent but without any human personality. “


If I understand your point correctly (and I would love a small drawing session the next we meet!), then yes, I do believe in beings (this is another term as I use somewhat hesitantly, but I can't think of a better one) that would fit the description of these unseen masters. I have not given thought to whether or not I am, let's say, in favour of the idea of a ascended human being who would be this master, because I think that if there was such a master they would be a part of the third option on this list, so a part of a divinity (in which I do believe). I am not at all certain that such beings have a, let's say their own individual "temperaments", or if they would be a sort of a hive mind (here, using this term again very loosely). But, like I mention, to this I have not given much thought.

Actually, I am not sure if one's own "higher self" is something that is separatable from the latter two because I feel that these are perhaps kind of a same thing but in a way that is not at all egoistic (I refer to certain occultists referring to themselves as gods or goddesses, which I find to be highly egoistic or even narcissistic, not to mention fucking delusional) but rather like steps on a ladder. And, I am not sure if it makes a difference if they (the unseen masters) are option one, or two, or three.

I believe that such beings are so complex and powerful (yet simple) that their form is recognizable from the "lower" entities, such as astral "mentors". The trick is perhaps that before one comes together with a unseen master, the difference is not clear, because it can not be imagined or understood before one is capable of understanding.

Not sure if this post is of any use. Pretty difficult topic. I look forward to reading more thoughts and comments on this.
User avatar
Cancer
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:45 pm
Location: Helsinki

Re: The Unseen Masters

Postby Cancer » Sat Apr 04, 2015 8:21 pm

It seems that I just wrote about this in the "preservation of seed"-thread. Being in contact with what could be called a divinity is, at least for me, such an intensely private experience that it's nearly imposible to share it with anyone. Like sex. That's why I feel uneasy when the masters are talked about in any other than a completely subjective mode. It's also very difficult for me to use ritualistic tools, like the hymns in Fosforos, in my own "practice" (if indeed such a messy and uncertain mix of stuff can be called one). It feels like giving a name to something that is necessarily outside of language. Or simply making the original experience a different one.

However, one of the reasons I'm a member in SoA is that I want to learn about these things from other people. The Prayer of Azazel and the other hymns have, for example, given me a pricelessly valuable point of reference concerning prayer and the like. They have helped me to articulate my religious feelings much more accurately than before, although I've found it hard to actually use them.

At the moment I view the masters in the same way. They provide a system in which I can try to class my feelings and thoughts about divinities and archetypes. I can't say that I believe in them, because saying anything in a philosophical tone of voice - the one people use to define what's factually in the world and what's not - would, in this context, be irrelevant, superfluous. In the few happy moments when I feel that a divinity is in some way present, questioning it's existence is for me as pointless as questioning the existence of a good friend I'm talking with. Same goes for affirming it's existence. The questioning / affirming and communication simply take place at different levels of reality. To put it strikingly, I could say that certain archetypes as well as certain people are for me vastly more important than the questions of existence vs. nonexistence, which are in the end just parts of a game. Who supports which worldview? Who's a sceptic, who's not? Who cares?

Philosophically I am precisely a sceptic, because being anything else would conflict with my (socially created) identity and feel like lying, but my scepticism concerns the world only as seen in the third person perspective. In it, there's no reason to believe that religious experience has any kind of objective basis, but outside of it, in the first person, the notion of belief or non-belief becomes irrelevant. When the focus is shifted thus, there is, insted of facts, only commitment, for better or worse.

The blog entry was very interesting and informative, so thank you, fra. Nefastos.
Tiden läker inga sår.
User avatar
Nefastos
Frater
Posts: 3482
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: The Unseen Masters

Postby Nefastos » Sun Apr 05, 2015 12:24 am

Heith wrote:as this is something that would be easier for me were it explained with a picture. When I read the text I begin to sketch a kind of diagram or picture in my mind, especially when it comes to

“For the master is:
– One’s inner “higher self” (= the monadic unity of our âtma-buddhi-manas).
– An ascended human being who is known by a pseudonym or a title.
– A divinity, who is superconscious and omnipresent but without any human personality. “


Let's try with that picture then, shall we?

The human being is like a sign of the Sun, the dot in the middle & a circle surrounding it. The central dot is the invisible Eye or the "I" or the Ego, that moves its gaze in different points of the circle. The circle, in turn, is the time-bound personality, namely, the Ego's interaction with the outside world. The whole circle is our life. "The" life if we identify ourselves with the personality; "a" life if we identify ourselves with the Ego. The Ego-point is the Master, or more accurately, master number one or the "higher self".

Then to Master number three, a divinity. Let's consider that our Sun-circle is not a two- but a three-dimensional model: a sphere, or say, a planet. That spherical planet has its north pole pointing to a certain celestial sign. All the signs are meaningful to all people, but our different "polarities" (temperaments of the Ego) point to the different constellations. Our personal Master is such a divinity which is a closest one to our life in a lesser or greater cycle of time. Although a wise person does revere all the constellations or heavenly bodies equally, even if he personally takes one as his most intimate mentor. (Also, we know that the north star and the "master constellation" linked to it does in fact change every now and then because of the planetary precession. So this master, unlike the first, will change accordingly.)

But the second Master is neither our own polar axis nor the constellation it points to. Rather, if we continue with the same set of parables, we can say that it is our Sun. A visible and rather close (in this case, still human) celestial body, but superior to ourselves. Something that is not only a teacher or a doctor in a Western meaning of a word, viz. a relative authority, but an absolute one.

But yet there is a path open that follows not the Sun, but the Moon as one's esoterical guide. One needs not put his mind to the contemplation of this master to receive a great deal of his blessing. (In this meaning, the Moon path is actually spoken of in the Bhagavad-Gita & elsewhere, & has the meaning of the blog text's "astral" & pratyêka paths.)

Heith wrote:This is a topic I felt was really important when it was first mentioned on another thread on the members' (finnish) forum.


It is important, in a way. But mostly in a negative way: if this thing is handled wrongly, all the intelligent people will vanish from the brotherhood, & in that they act wisely. For the time of the hero cults is & should be over.

In the times like ours, I think one should definitely & always seek the Master number one, i.e. one's inner true identity, one's own dharma, the fundamental Self. Also to all people who have the "intuitive spark" - who are not atheists - I would most heartily suggest finding, following & adoring also the Master number three, i.e. a God. Of whatever pantheon, but in a purified, philosophical, definitely not fundamentalist way. But only to a very few people, who already have found the other Masters, I would suggest keeping one's heart open & bleeding for the Master number two. I haven't even wanted to talk about this until now, when the situation demanded it.

When I noticed your post today I was just reading an article named "The Mercurian Master: Hermes' Gift to the the Theosophical Society" by Brendan French. I think Brendan tries, in a way, to be fair: he starts with not too overt criticism towards the idea of the unseen masters (in theosophy, which is the object of his study in the article). But long before end his ideas betray themselves, and it becomes apparent that he thinks, like 99,99 % of the intelligent people in our culture, that such masters cannot be but a lie, or maybe a pathological delusion. This is how our culture is almost fundamentally built. Interestingly enough, Brendan even says it himself, quoting the ideas of the theosophists:

--- standing behind everyone who enters on the path of development, there is the absolute authority of a guru – which is impossible in the West due to the general cultural situation.


Emphasis mine. In a certain point, a "guru" or a Master would be needed as surely as one would need a parent to have means to enter into the (or rather, any) world, but that point is so distant to the great majority of people, that to ask people to believe in such miracle-workers would be the opposite of spiritual advancement: it would be regression, and falling into foolish adoration of the false idols.

On the other hand, if some people have personally experienced both practically and intellectually the things that prove that there are two occult facts yet hidden from public knowledge, namely the possibilities of both immortality in spirit & definite magical power, one can no longer deny the spiritual evolution and the human beings evolved to the states of perfection. But even a concept of such a superman is laughable to almost all in our culture, and rightfully so. I hope, and even trust, that such a scepticism will finally help the humankind to rise into intellectual adulthood - the one it seeks today in the temper tantrums and scorns of its spiritual puberty.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
User avatar
Nefastos
Frater
Posts: 3482
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: The Unseen Masters

Postby Nefastos » Mon Apr 06, 2015 11:21 am

By the way, now when I have lately written many White aspect -oriented texts, I already started to write "an apology for the Moon Paths" text, concerning the Red & Black aspects and their methods. But, whether luckily or unluckily, there was so much to say about the subject, I think it will become at least a blog entry if not a book of its own, instead of just a forum post...

Just a short addendum, then: Even while it is important for an occultist to understand that the astral phase is not the highest nor the phase of "philosophical wandering" (pratyêka) is the only path possible for an intelligent seeker of truth, both of these methods can well be seen as true ideals. And when I wrote that working in the astral brotherhoods can mean the end of one's spiritual career, that is always relative: with sound reason, it doesn't have to be a dead end. Rather, having such definite parapsychological proof might be an important step in one's path of initiations.

And so on, and so forth. It would be most unwelcome for the Star of Azazel if the different ideals of the White, Red and Black (both formless and formal aspects) would be in disharmony, even if it would be the over-polarization of the sattvic White. These are just things that needed to be said, I believe.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
User avatar
RaktaZoci
Posts: 1429
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:32 pm
Location: Salo

Re: The Unseen Masters

Postby RaktaZoci » Tue Apr 07, 2015 10:59 am

This is an important topic, indeed. Commented briefly on the Finnish side already, but I do believe this deserves a line or two more..

The sun metaphor is very descriptive, atleast in my opinion. I can relate to it also more closely as I've been translating the text Fohat lately. From a theosophic standpoint, I'd see the first "form" of the master(s) as the Christ-self (Kristus-minä) that Ervast talks of. But it crossed my mind that maybe this very stance makes me blind to other aspects on the matter? Perhaps an objective point of view would be better?

Talking of the Moon path, to which I can strongly relate to, because of my emotive nature; I'd see the astral world as a mandatory waypoint on one's path, but as it is explained in The Voice of Silence (and Nefastos' commentary to it), The beings of the Mask etc. it is deceptive by nature, a world of "pretty shells", so to speak. Regardless, it is still a plane (or a phase, level, or whatever one wants to call it) one has to travel through, to be able to reach that which is beyond (as Nefastos mentioned above).
die Eule der Minerva beginnt erst mit der einbrechenden Dämmerung ihren Flug.
-Hegel
obnoxion
Sodalis
Posts: 1831
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 7:59 pm

Re: The Unseen Masters

Postby obnoxion » Tue Apr 14, 2015 10:12 am

As one of the members who are 100% behind Johannes in this matter, I feel obliged to say something. So, why I believe in the Unseen Masters? I haven’t been in contact with one. The way Alice Bailey writes about them still sounds shockingly everydayish; Master such-and such lives in a house in this particular place and the houses of masters this & that are situated nearby. So in a way I choose to have faith despite there are several things that make me react with skepticism. Yet faith and doubt are both Saturnian virtues, and I feel they go together perfectly.

The miraculous and the incredible should be one of the focuses of any religious pursuit. One of the most important functions of vital religion has been to carve out and vivify images, to conjure up words of meaning and strangeness from the utterly unknowable. And I feel these are the most important building blocks of the human worldview. Though I vastly respect the knowledge humanity has gained by scientific method, making this our age in many ways the best age for men in known history, there is just not nearly enough in the constantly evolving certainties of natural sciences to build an understanding of the world, man, life and death. So there is an immediate hope of knowledge in religion not found anywhere else, though there are glimpses of it in Philosophy and Art.

The essentiality of a master or superior teacher comes across as sheer necessity in the original teachings calling themselves the Left Hand Path. I associate the ideals of Guruyoga to the choice of believing in the Ascended Masters. Though a modern westerner might well interpret this as something that could be disposed of, (not unlike we were quite willing to dispose of the “preservation of seed” in our other recent forum topic) I feel that without it we lack a fundamental requirement for an authentic LHP.

I have felt it is a serious handicap that the traditional Guruyoga is almost impossible in our contemporary setting, so I welcome any attempt to make it somehow possible. Having faith in ascended masters – a faith that isn’t vague, but concrete – can be at least a very powerful angle to LHP esoterism, even if any masters would never be met. The Masters of Theosophy are here very appropriate, not only for the high standard of their teaching, but also because it reaches to original vitality from the founding energies of Theosophy, which, after all, is where our novel tradition stems.

My guruyoga practice is mainly done by seeing my guru in my children, whom I love unconditionally and who make me serve them in a way where I daily have to put aside my own basic needs again and again. Yet they teach me knowledge of myself and the world, and give me unparalleled happiness. But as an esoterist I have always had a deep reverence for the accomplished ancestors of my spiritual path, and also a sense of being guided by something superior. Yet I live my everyday life in the same world as everybody else, and I know perfectly well what is common, what is improbable and what is incredible. In the course of my life I have made a choice to have faith in certain things that fall outside of the scientifically proven. I have many times paused to consider my decision from all angles, perfectly ready to give up everything if I would found myself to be making an error. But I have been happy with my choices. And above all, I have been intellectually satisfied. I know perfectly well the basic difference between a scientific fact and an old religious teaching about, for example, the adventures of the Mahasiddhas. What makes my views unconventional is, I suppose, the value in which I hold these things both in themselves and in relation to each other. It is a view full of subtleties and nuances that would be impossible to communicate within the limits of a forum post. And I know that no matter how hard I would try to explain myself, my views will make me a laughing stock to many people. I can readily admit that I’m not above that and it makes me sad. But don’t we all need some courage in holding our hearts’ convictions sometimes, so I don’t think I’m an exception.

In the end I must stress how very happy I am that guruyoga will not be the only method of esoterism in the Brotherhood. I would never be able to demand someone to believe against his or her judgement. I remember Martin Luther admitting that as God is in a sense everywhere, there are many ways to Him, but that He desires that we only use the one taught by Christianity. Unlike Luther, I believe all sentient beings arrive to him by many paths. So I think the Brotherhood should include many paths. And what is this God I believe in? As said before, it is Everything. It is the Unity of Everything. So even if I would never see anything out of the ordinary, I would still believe in God, because I have never seen anything else but God. As I see it, there is nothing but God. This is way I live in a completely ordinary world, but at the same time in a world completely out of the ordinary. It is a world where faith comes easily, and I am thankful of it.
One day of Brahma has 14 Indras; his life has 54 000 Indras. One day of Vishnu is the lifetime of Brahma. The lifetime of Vishnu is one day of Shiva.
User avatar
RaktaZoci
Posts: 1429
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:32 pm
Location: Salo

Re: The Unseen Masters

Postby RaktaZoci » Tue Apr 14, 2015 3:28 pm

A brilliant post once again from fra obnoxion, as usual! I can relate 100 % to this:
obnoxion wrote:My guruyoga practice is mainly done by seeing my guru in my children, whom I love unconditionally and who make me serve them in a way where I daily have to put aside my own basic needs again and again. Yet they teach me knowledge of myself and the world, and give me unparalleled happiness.
Considering the rest of the topic, a somewhat humorous quote raised in my mind when I was reading this:
obnoxion wrote: I believe all sentient beings arrive to him by many paths.
In a semi-recent discussion on facebook the topic came about the old Transformers comic/series, in which the leader of the Autobots (ie. the good guys), Optimus Prime, used to say:

"Freedom is the right of all sentient beings"

In this connection, the freedom to choose if one wants to believe or not to believe. That is something every individual must do for themselves, by themselves and I do believe that there should be no judging, no matter what the decision would be. People who choose to believe, do so, and the ones that choose not to, should be respected for their decision.

Only thing I see negative is the so called "blind faith", which I interpret fra obnoxion is talking of here also. One shouldn't believe just for the habit of "believing in something", but more so, one should believe in what he/she finds to be right.

Life can be a wondrous adventure, if one chooses to believe so.
die Eule der Minerva beginnt erst mit der einbrechenden Dämmerung ihren Flug.
-Hegel

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest