Is the Hierarchy for real? I pretty much follow the line of theosopy->AY->my current spiritual state, accepting the main and mutual tenets of it. (Karma, Reincarnation), but I have certain reservation of the existence of the "invisible knights", the "puppet masters". For I have not felt their presence. 

My AY teacher explained the concept of Hierarchy  to me in a most simplistic terms. "There are of those who are higher than us", - makes sense, right? But does that mean that they are here among us and driving things invisibly. Things are quite fouled up all over the world.  

Do you believe in this Hierarchy? Have you ever felt their presence? In real or in dreams?

Views: 764

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

To Jon's comment:

It was in part the questions: "Have you ever felt their presence? In real or in dreams?" in the initial post that caused me to focus on the 'subset', as those questions seemed more about that than about hierarchy as a concept.

Yes.  I have no squabble whatsoever of there beings both higher and lower than us in consciousness, extraterrestrial life, and life consciousness beyond that form we know as "beings."  As a clairvoyant medium, I would by my nature have perceived all of these things in one way or another, or at one time or another; thought certainly NOT ALL of them (for which there would be a reason, but it is not necessary to go into that here). 

 

I read the references to actually question THOSE PARTICULAR [examples] of "hierarchy," personified in humans, to-day, in history, legend or myth.  This would narrow down the possible scope of answers quite considerably, though, I would prefer the [THOSE] be individually specificed, for both the belief and experience can and will be quite different between the [examples], and possible examples, WHERE there was some experience that occured.

 

christian von lahr

I wish the posts were NUMBERED, I am not so sure the reporting process is consistent from Discussion to Discussion, Group to Group and Thread to Thread; is it top-down, bottom-up ... I sometimes start at the wrong end.

Farron said,

 The wise people cannot and don't will to change the world or humanity, ...

 

I don't see why this would be logical, desirable or beneficial???  I should think wise people would WANT to change both, and why change one if your would not change the other?  Why entertain any thought of extraterrestrial life (Starseeds).  Everything in the Universe is collectively "Nature."  The universe is essentially the nature of all consciousness; it seems inherent in [that] greater Nature that all things help all things; rather boddhisatva on a grand scale (I might even be willing to drop the word "things", which I used twice, and capitalize "all" to ALL period.

 

christian von lahr

 

I didn't see this from my iPhone, when I made my first reply ... sounds like we were thinking the same thing:

 

So there are two ideas floating about. The first revolves around the idea of the existence of humans among us who are evolved, much as the theosophical co. line proposes.  I stated my opinion earlier and won't revisit it again.  The second, which Jon makes good reference to involves people of wisdom.

 

christian von lahr

For all those discussing existence of Hierarchy here are requested to consider that it only shows the limitations of the Human mind in figuring out the working of the Divine. The concept of the Divine Hierarchy, IMHO was perhaps promoted to ensure acceptance of Human Hierarchy by the flock. No teaching so far has been able to describe how the Divine or the Absolute works. How anyone can then claim that a hierarchy exists to carry out the Divine Plan. Merely having some psychic abilities can hardly be a proof of a human or super-human being belonging to a privileged Hierarchy.

You people are out-discussing me!  I cannot keep up!  LOL   I'll just say that for me I do "believe in" the "The Hierarchy", but I don't think of them all as human beings.  For me they are consciousness(es), some planetary or solar, or beyond, although some are human, or what we would recognize as human, as Ferran spoke of.   Some are what we might think of as "aliens".

I don't see them all as white-bearded sages sitting around a table.  That's a convenient construct because we can relate easily to that, be it a family meeting around the kitchen table, or a meeting in a corporate board room, or King Arthur and his knights at the Round Table.   

But I do think they are there.  A human physical form is not absolutely required, but obviously useful sometimes when dealing with us.

Also as to levels and all that, as I understand it, it's a matter of vibration or frequency, at least in part.  There might be a better term, but I can't think of it at the moment.  While some of us may not be able to be within the consciousness of a planetary being, there are others who can, and they are like a bridge for us, because they and we can be within each other's consciousness.   Does that make sense?   

I will add this separately as it's a different aspect of this fascination with the Masters.   I think it's natural to be somewhat curious about this, but it's not good to get hung up on it.  That is an ego thing.  I have never been good at quoting chapter and verse, be it from the Bible or from the AAB books, but somewhere in one of them I think I read that the Master's don't concern themselves with our personality needs and desires, so trying to contact them, get their attention, etc. is not the thing to do, and really won't do any good.  They are only concerned with people in as much as a person is useful to The Work. 

I was thinking about this last night, and the analogy I came up with was a commanding officer picks a soldier to do a job based on how well he can accomplish the necessary task.  He doesn't have to like the fellow, or enjoy the same music, or the same politics, or whatever.  I guess for the Masters, the personality quirks of disciples don't come into it unless they begin to present problems in the accomplishment of the goals, or a danger to the disciple, perhaps some warnings would be given.  

But too much concern about "connecting" with the Masters, IMHO, can become a "personality ego-trip" and lead to delusion. 

So while I am curious about them, and the whole thing, I try to focus more on my own stuff, my own work, my relationship with the people around me, how I treat others, and how I think about things and what I am doing.  Is it helpful in the big picture?  Sometimes the answer is NO.  I am no ascended master, so I go back to the drawing board.  

So this "Hierarchy", is kinda like the Adjustment Bureau (film)???

Yes I saw this film recently another Phillip K D*** adaption of course.

I think the Hierarchy do not infringe our free will however.

There are many explanations of this hierarchy. They do not all mesh. In fact - the release of their "presence" has been a major device fracturing the groups of people who might otherwise work together. I am not sure if knowledge of their "existence" is constructive or destructive. I believe the later.

Nature does not like hierarchical groups; but her real success is through entities deciding to do things individually - and it all comes together in a self-organizing fashion. (Wolfram is a promoter of this idea). Hierarchies are highly inefficient and easy to disrupt forcing a total collapse of the entire workings.

The world is so messed up - I might begin to believe it has a hierarchy running it.

The flip side is that it is so messed up there is no way some organized structure is managing it...

Maybe the concept itself is an archetype of evil....     the archetype as another antithesis of free will. (I never saw the movie adjustment bureau)

 Hi, friends!!!

 Sometimes I still think that it would be good to offer some explanation of the terms used before starting discussions... but then I think that if it were possible, discussions probably would not start... John says that nature does not like hierarchical groups and I say that nature works through hierarchical groups. The inference is clear: the words "hierarchy" and "nature" don't mean the same for both.

 "Hierarchy" is a word that comes from the ancient Greek and is composed of "hieros", which means "holy, sacred" and "arche", that means "principle" meaning both "beginning" and "foundation". 

 So anyone who really wants to understand the idea of hierarchy can ask inwards "What is holy, sacred, to me?" and honestly follow this thread....

 ... but this path lies next to the religious and it is so very subjective.... so I got another idea to show how hierarchy (and esoterical stuff by the way) just can't be helped, so we'll have to live with it...

 The fact is that I'm writing here right now because of an existing, real, active, present, hierarchy.

 No, I don't mean that Maitreya and the Masters of Wisdom are inspiring what I might write, not at all. :-P

 This site did not begin out of nothing, but because someone began it and keeps taking care of it, our big boss or Hierarch, Joe. And he does not do this alone, he has formed a team of administrators in which Anand, our public relations or Hierophant, stands out.

 The administrators or hierarchy of the site take care of many things inside that ordinary members don't know about (esoterical stuff) but which are needed to make it possible for anyone to be writing here. 

 Are the administrators of this site an antithesis of free will? Is their capacity to delete a writing a thread to my freedom?  Do they deserve my respect for their work here?

 I don't see any difference between the hierarchy running this site and what people usually call "Hierarchy" in big capital letters, except of size, and size is relative.

 Have fun today, friends!!! 

 

  

   

 

 

 

  

Thanks Ferran.

The example that you provide deals with social hierarchy. When we write with capital H we usually indicate what could perhaps be described as the Spiritual Hierarchy, believed to be guiding the humanity and evolution. John's point is proved by the argument that if they do exist and work as believed, then they have failed in their task because they are working against the natural principles of organization as existing in nature like the cells of the human body or the organization of leaves, branches, trunk and the root of a tree. The natural principle requires each component of the system to work in harmony. The Spiritual Hierarchy, by assuming disproportionate influence (power) in comparison to their surroundings, violate the principle of harmony and therefore are unsuccessful.

RSS

Search Theosophy.Net!

Loading

What to do...

Join Theosophy.Net Blogs Forum Live Chat Invite Facebook Facebook Group

A New View of Theosophy


About
FAQ

Theosophy References


Wiki Characteristics History Spirituality Esotericism Mysticism RotR ToS

Our Friends

© 2021   Created by Theosophy Network.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service