The Avatar

WHAT EXACTLY IS AN AVATAR, ACCORDING TO THEOSOPHY?

The Sanskrit word “Avatar” or “Avatara” literally means “Descended One” or “One who has descended from a high place.”

H. P. Blavatsky’s “Theosophical Glossary” entry for “Avatara” simply defines it as “Divine incarnation. The descent of a god or some exalted Being, who has progressed beyond the necessity of Rebirths, into the body of a simple mortal.” (p. 44)

Her “Glossary” entry for “Incarnations” (p. 154) adds that “Truly divine incarnation, or the avatar doctrine, constituted the grandest mystery of every old religious system!”

The “Glossary” entry for “Chandra-vansa” (p. 76) briefly mentions “the deep occult meaning of the Avatar; a meaning which only esoteric philosophy can explain.”

“Once landed on, and having touched this planet of dense matter, no snow-white wings of the highest angel can remain immaculate, or the Avatar (or incarnation) be perfect, as every such Avatar is the fall of a god into generation.” (HPB, “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 2, p. 483-484)

Perhaps the most famous of all statements regarding Avatars is the words of the Avatar known as Krishna, said to have been taught by him around 5,000 years ago and recorded in the Bhagavad Gita, chapter 4, verses 7-8, which William Q. Judge renders as:

“I produce myself among creatures, O son of Bharata, whenever there is a decline of virtue and an insurrection of vice and injustice in the world; and thus I incarnate from age to age for the preservation of the just, the destruction of the wicked, and the establishment of righteousness.” (p. 31, Theosophy Company edition)

It was remarked by HPB: “This “Mystery” is found, for him who understands its right meaning, in the dialogue between Krishna and Arjuna, in the Bhagavad Gita, chapter iv. [HPB then quotes Gita 4:4-9 and continues:] Thus, all the Avatâras are one and the same: the Sons of their “Father” in a direct descent and line; the “Father” or one of the seven Flames becoming for the time being the Son and these two being one — in Eternity. What is the Father? Is it the absolute Cause of all? — the fathomless Eternal No; most decidedly. It is Kâranâtma, the “Causal Soul,” which in its general sense is called by the Hindus Îshvara, the Lord, . . . Each human being has, moreover, his own divine Spirit or personal God. That divine Entity or Flame from which Buddhi emanates stands in the same relation to man, though on a lower plane, as the Dhyâni-Buddha to his human Buddha. . . . Truly, “for the salvation of the good and the destruction of wickedness,” the personalities known as Gautama, Shankara, Jesus and a few others were born each in his age as declared — “I am born in every Yuga” — and they were all born through the same Power.” (“The Doctrine of Avataras” posthumously published)

“. . . the Records of the “Thirty-five Buddhas of Confession,” as they are exoterically called. These personages, however, though called in the Northern Buddhist religion “Buddhas,” may just as well be called Rishis, or Avatars, etc., . . . these “Buddhas,” or the “Enlightened,” the far distant predecessors of Gautama the Buddha, and who represent, we are taught, once living men, great adepts and Saints, in whom the “Sons of Wisdom” had incarnated, and who were, therefore, so to speak, minor Avatars of the Celestial Beings . . .” (HPB, “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 2, p. 423)

We often say that Theosophy thus speaks of Avatars as incarnations of the Logos or the divine universal Spirit. The famous opening words of John’s Gospel speak of the Word (“Logos” in the original Greek) as existing “in the beginning, with God and as God” and which produced all of manifestation and later “was made flesh, and dwelt among us.” Unlike Christianity, the Esoteric Philosophy does not believe that such a scenario is exclusively limited to the man known as Jesus or Yeshua.

However, simply defining an Avatar as “an incarnation of the Logos” who has been born on Earth for some specific great purpose, is rather vague and can easily lead us to assume that any genuine Avatar would essentially resemble and act like a veritable god in human form, an obvious angel walking among men, and conforming to all our stereotypical religious expectations of what a wholly “pure,” “perfect,” “infallible” Being would or “should” be like. Being a student of Theosophy does not automatically cure us from all deep-seated effects of religious or theological conditioning.

Notice the wording of the first quote above: an Avatar is “The descent of a god or some exalted Being, who has progressed beyond the necessity of Rebirths, into the body of a simple mortal.”

So we are not necessarily talking about gods, celestial beings, Dhyan Chohans, or Dhyani Buddhas here, in the sense in which we would typically picture or understand these terms. An “exalted Being” who has progressed inwardly over myriads of lifetimes to the point of freedom from the cycle of rebirth is part of the definition of a Mahatma, a Master of Wisdom.

Voluntarily incarnating into another body (one specially selected and arranged for the task) through Their own Yogic occult power and knowledge, out of great compassion for suffering humanity and a wise awareness of what is needed in the world at a particular crucial period of time in cyclic evolution in order to best help humanity in the right direction, and having taken upon Themselves – in consultation with other Masters of this Earth’s Great Brotherhood – the responsibility for directly spearheading such a mission . . . that is an Avatar.

But how can the above scenario be said to be a literally divine incarnation, an embodiment of one of the Seven Flames, also called the Seven Rays, Seven Dhyanis, etc.? Aren’t the Masters always emphasised to be humans?

A Master, when incarnated – and many are said to be incarnated in the world at any one time, albeit not in a public and Avataric sense – is indeed a human being in physical form and appearance. A Master is outwardly a human. But They are termed “Masters” precisely because They have inwardly consciously reunited and re-merged with Their own Inner God, or Higher Ego, or Divine Soul, or Immortal Spiritual Individuality, or Manasaputra, Kumara, Agnishvatta, Solar Angel, or whatever we may wish to call it. Therefore, although outwardly a man or woman, a Master is inwardly attuned and at one with a divine entity, an immaculate beam of pure Light.

We all have this within us but most of us have not yet re-become ONE with it. HPB writes that each human being is an incarnation of his or her own God, and that for each person on Earth there is a God in the Heavens, and each person is that God, although few are aware of it or would even give credence to such a thing. These Gods are all one in source, nature, and essence, but differ with regard to their individualised Karmic streams. They are all rays of the Logos, which itself is the radiation from ABSOLUTENESS.

“The adepts have each their Dhyani-Buddha, their elder “twin Soul,” and they know it, calling it “Father-Soul,” and “Father-Fire.” It is only at the last and supreme initiation, however, that they learn it when placed face to face with the bright “Image.”” (HPB, “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 1, p. 573)

This is how, if an advanced Master – even while physically incarnated in Their own primary body – takes occupancy of another physical body, for a special work and mission, it can truly be called a “divine incarnation,” as much as it may differ to all appearances from any ultra-idealised, theology-inspired mental images we may have of what such a thing should “look” like. The Master’s mind is “one with the Over-Soul.” (“The Voice of The Silence” p. 51, original edition)

“The Tchang-chub [i.e. Jangchub, the Tibetan word for “Bodhisattva”] (an adept who has, by the power of his knowledge and Soul-enlightenment, become exempt from the curse of unconscious transmigration) – may, at his will and desire, and instead of reincarnating himself only after bodily death, do so, and repeatedly – during his life if he chooses. He holds the power of choosing for himself new bodies – whether on this or any other planet – while in possession of his old form, that he generally preserves for purposes of his own.” (Master K.H., “The Mahatma Letters” p. 285)

SO THEN THE QUESTION NATURALLY ARISES: WHEN DO AVATARS COME?

There are several statements throughout H. P. Blavatsky’s writings which assert that no new Avatar will appear until the very far distant future, at the end of the entire Kali Yuga, which is said to be hundreds of thousands of years away. But the context of these passages could be seen as indicating that she is referring there specifically to the Kalki Avatar spoken of in Hinduism, which the Esoteric Philosophy explains to be the same as the future Buddha Maitreya, Saoshyant of the Zoroastrians, and so forth, even though the exoteric details found in these religions differ.

For in the article “The Esoteric Character of The Gospels” (published in three parts in late 1887 and early 1888) HPB writes:

“Millenarians and Adventists of robust faith, may go on saying that “the coming of (the carnalised) Christ” is near at hand, and prepare themselves for “the end of the world.” Theosophists – at any rate, some of them – who understand the hidden meaning of the universally expected Avatars, Messiahs, Sosioshes, and Christs – know that it is no “end of the world,” but “the consummation of the age,” i.e., the close of a cycle, which is now fast approaching. . . . There are several remarkable cycles that come to a close at the end of this [19th] century. First, the 5,000 years of the Kaliyuga cycle; again the Messianic cycle of the Samaritan (also Kabalistic) Jews of the man connected with Pisces (Ichthys or “Fish-man” Dag). It [i.e. the Messianic Cycle] is a cycle, historic and not very long, but very occult, lasting about 2,155 solar years, but having a true significance only when computed by lunar months. It occurred 2410 and 255 B.C., or when the equinox entered into the sign of the Ram [i.e. Aries], and again into that of Pisces. When it enters, in a few years, the sign of Aquarius, psychologists will have some extra work to do, and the psychic idiosyncrasies of humanity will enter on a great change.”

From this short passage, we can see that –

(1) The astrological or zodiacal Ages of approximately 2,155 years are being referred to and it is declared that the Age of Pisces or Piscean Age was then – at the end of the 19th century – virtually at its end, with the New Age of Aquarius or Aquarian Age due to begin “in a few years” from when that article was written. If one does the mathematics using the figures and dates give, the year 1900 would mark the dawning of the Aquarian Age . . . but we should note that HPB uses the word “about,” hence it would be overly hasty and presumptuous to conclude that 1900 definitely and exactly marked the beginning of the Age of Aquarius.

(2) The cycle of astrological ages – such as Aries, Pisces, Aquarius, and so on – is referred to as “the Messianic cycle” and described as “very occult.” And although HPB does not directly assert or distinctly spell out that “the close of a cycle” of this type and the dawning of the next is associated with the incarnation, appearance, or manifestation, of an Avatar, she does undeniably imply and insinuate it by connecting the two subjects inextricably together, by saying that “the close of a cycle, which is now fast approaching” directly relates to “the hidden meaning of the universally expected Avatars, Messiahs, Sosioshes, and Christs.”

But in her posthumously published article “Cycles and Avataras” she settles the matter by using that term “Messianic” as a synonym for “Avataric,” speaking of “the Avataric or Messianic Mystery.” We can therefore read the “Esoteric Character of The Gospels” quote as saying that each astrological Age is an Avataric cycle.

The expectation of an Avatar in this Age of Aquarius, and perhaps sometime near its dawning, is thus entirely justifiable from the perspective of the original teachings of Theosophy, leaving all the later versions of “Theosophy” aside for the moment.

WHO IS THE AVATAR FOR THE AQUARIAN AGE?

It seems not to occur to most people that such an Incarnation may already have taken place, over a century ago, right near the exact dawning point of the New Age or New Cycle. Human nature is such that we love to seek out a still living or recently living person to identify and accept as the Avatar (and there is no shortage of people claiming to be exactly that; at this very moment, literally thousands of people around the world are convinced that they are the Aquarian Avatar and are trying to convince others of it; over the past 120 years or so, many more thousands have experienced and spread the same delusion) or to pinpoint an exact or approximate date for such an Avatar to appear in the world, such as 1977, 2000, 2012, 2025, etc. In other words, we want our Avatar and we want him NOW . . . or as close to now as possible.

In the Theosophical Movement, there have been claims made by, and on behalf of, certain individuals. In “The Theosophical Society – Adyar,” the young Jiddu Krishnamurti was in 1909 proclaimed by C. W. Leadbeater and Annie Besant to be the chosen vehicle through which the “Lord Christ-Maitreya” would incarnate as the Avatar and World Teacher for the Aquarian Age. And in the United Lodge of Theosophists, Raghavan Iyer in 1975 publicly claimed (in the third person) to be the new Teacher foretold by HPB for the 1975-2000 Cycle and made hints, which were later stated much more definitely and overtly, that he was also the Avatar of the Aquarian Age, and referred to himself as Krishna, Maitreya, Kalki, the Maha-Guru, and so on.

Yet in the understanding – and, some would say, the knowledge – of the ULT’s founder Robert Crosbie and later influentual ULT figure B. P. Wadia, it was HPB who had fulfilled that role of the Avatar, even though she herself never claimed or hinted at such a thing. It was a frequently stated belief in and by the ULT during its first few decades that “HPB” was really inwardly the Master M. or Mahatma Morya, and that this high Initiate had become responsible for the “Blavatsky body” after the original Helena Blavatsky permanently departed from it in the 1860s, prior to beginning her public Theosophical work. The view was likewise expressed that the main Intelligence working through the body of HPB’s closest colleague and co-founder William Q. Judge was the Master K.H. or Mahatma Koot Hoomi, known to be the closest colleague and co-worker of Master Morya.

With regard to HPB, this deep and sacred subject is examined extensively in the article Who are you, Madame Blavatsky? We recommend reading that in conjunction with the quotes below, as they go hand in hand.

That article includes a quote from the Master K.H. which says about H. P. Blavatsky: “After nearly a century of fruitless search, our chiefs had to avail themselves of the only opportunity to send out a European body upon European soil to serve as a connecting link between that country and our own” (“The Mahatma Letters” p. 203)

Notice it was a body the Masters had been searching for (it was K.H. who italicised the word for special emphasis), not a soul, not a particular individual or person, but a body, specifically a European one; a Western body for a largely Western – but nevertheless global – mission. And remember what was said earlier:

Now let us see what Robert Crosbie and other sources from the publications of the United Lodge of Theosophists have to say:

Having quoted those words of HPB from “The Esoteric Character of The Gospels” which we quoted from a little earlier, mentioning the Messianic or Avataric cycle corresponding to the astrological Ages, including the then-imminent Age of Aquarius, Crosbie writes: “The esoteric savior is no man, but the divine principle in every human being. What is needed is a knowledge of the Path that leads to Him or It. The foolish look for a “Man”; the wise look for a “Message.” Few know the Messenger when He comes, but it is possible for many to know a true Message by putting it to every conceivable test. The “Messiah” has come and gone; but He has left the “Comforter” – His Message. He will return, but not for several generations of men. It is possible for men to get at the truth of these things if they will take the trouble to make the search in all sincerity. H. P. B. said, “Do not follow me nor my path; follow the Path I show, the Masters who are behind.” This she knew to be the safe course for all, for each one will judge of the words and deeds of a personality from his own standpoint and understanding, some under-rating, some exaggerating, and some with indifference. . . . A Siddha-Purusha (perfect man) is like an archeologist who removes the dust and lays open an old well which has been covered up by ages of disuse. The Avatara, on the other hand, is like an engineer who sinks a new well in a place where there was no water before. Great Men give salvation to those only who have the waters of piety hidden in themselves, but the Avatara saves him too whose heart is devoid of love and dry as a desert.” (Robert Crosbie, “The Friendly Philosopher” p. 151-152)

“Again, very close to 1900, the sun passed into the sign of Aquarius. . . . was there any Messenger teaching the Three Truths [i.e. the Three Fundamental Propositions of Theosophy, such as presented in the Proem of Vol. 1 of “The Secret Doctrine” by HPB and which are in reality universal truths] at the time the sun passed into Aquarius? Yes; in 1875 Madame Blavatsky began to teach Theosophy, just as we are learning it now.” (“The Eternal Verities: For Old Souls in Young Bodies” p. 238-239)

“To Theosophists who have learned something of the subtle magnetic ties of Karma which bind men, things, places, and events; and who, watching the tides of world history from the lofty tower erected fifty years ago by H. P. Blavatsky, the Avatar of the new age, . . .” (“Science and The Secret Doctrine,” “Theosophy” magazine, April 1930)

“The Message brought by H. P. Blavatsky is the most universal in its scope, the most nearly all-inclusive and profound in its presentation, of any of the great Messages that the history and traditions of the human race afford. Great Adepts have appeared from time to time, who have been hailed as Avatars by succeeding generations. Great Saviours have visited this and that people and granted them some portion of the Secret Doctrine, which in time degenerated into a religion and a worship. Where in recorded history or tradition known to the Western World has there been so vast a commitment of eternal truth as is embodied in Theosophy? What, then, must be the nature of that Being who in the mortal garment known as H. P. Blavatsky was able to bring within the range of human language and human perception so vast an importation from another world, of whose very existence we had lost all knowledge and all faith? Even as by study and application we are brought to the conclusion that in Theosophy is the greatest Message from the Masters that this race has ever received, even so are we forced to the unavoidable conclusion that in H. P. Blavatsky was Incarnated, to the extent that the highest available form produced by the Race could endure, “That Great INITIATE OF ALL Whose Single Will Keeps This Whole Movement in Being [i.e. an expression first used by William Q. Judge to refer to the Master M.].” (Robert Crosbie, “Masters and Their Message,” “Theosophy” magazine, August 1914)

“If the spiritually perfected men who come as divine incarnations at different periods of the world’s history do not have to come, yet there must be conditions on earth that draw them here. The nature of the Egos on the earth at any given time is what brings about the appearance of a Great Being. Then, too, such Beings appear at the intersections of great cycles, as occurred between 1875 and 1898 when three great cycles intersected. The first five thousand year period of Kaliyuga, which began at the death of Krishna, the Teacher of the “Bhagavad-Gita,” was completed in this time. The hundred year cycle, when in the last twenty-five years of every century an effort is made by the Great Lodge, through Teachers or their disciples, to place better ideas before mankind was also in operation. The sun, during this period, passed from Pisces into Aquarius, and there, too, was a sign. The intersection of these three cycles, then, meant several things, but one signification was that in or about that period a Great Personage would appear on the earth, with such knowledge as the civilization and the mind of the time would allow. If we want to know who that Being was, we have only to think along the lines of our studies. The being known to the world as H. P. Blavatsky was known to the Masters by quite another name, as They stated, and the knowledge put forward by Her, or by Him, is what we know as Theosophy. . . .

“Religions, sciences, governments, and peoples were all changing. For that very reason the Great Personage came. The conditions were such as to permit that visit and make possible the greatest benefit from it. When old forms are changing, men’s minds are more open, and then is the time for the work that only great Beings can do. . . . All these are considerations which bring back Saviors, and they point to one thing which we ought and need to understand — that the One who began the work in this country is second to none. If we will study the teachings of that Being and of that Great Lodge with this idea in mind, the better will be our understanding. The more we can understand from that point of view, the more we shall receive — the closer shall we reach to wisdom. The status of that Being is one great lesson which an understanding of the law of cycles should teach us. . . .

“The fact of the intersection of three cycles pointing to a very extraordinary event in the coming of a certain Personage lies at the root of an understanding of the whole philosophy. If we do not grasp the fact that the source of the philosophy is an actual knowledge, and realize that the Being who presented that knowledge knew it, and gave out all that could be given at this time, we have not got the first clue. With that clue, we can get more and more light in every direction; we can see what these things mean, for it actually tends to open what you might call the spiritual eye.” (Robert Crosbie, “Answers To Questions on The Ocean of Theosophy” p. 190-193)

“Some Theosophists are looking and longing for a “coming Christ,” though how they can do so in the face of the teachings of Theosophy is a mystery. Just what they expect such a being to accomplish is not clear. The records best known to us of such a being show a message delivered and an example set; how humanity has accepted and made use of the message and profited by the example is a matter of history. . . . It is presumed that the expected “Christ” will be in human form; how are we to know him? Will he say so himself? If so, would one be wise or foolish to accept such a claim? . . . Should such an one come to the world would he make claims? Has any such ever done so? Surely such a being would be wise enough to know that anyone can make claims, as in the past and doubtless in the future. By his works men would come to recognize his knowledge and power; such has been the way in the past, and what else have we to judge by? Hence if claims are made of such a nature, it should be enough [i.e. sufficient to see that the claim is false] for any human being of sound judgment, let alone those who are supposed to know something of the fundamental principles of Theosophy. There has been one vital point that has been missed in all these speculations and expectations. There has been One here with a world message, the greatness and importance of which has not begun to be perceived by the majority of Theosophical students. Had there been the first basic perception of what that great fact meant, no such misconceptions and follies as those noted could ever have arisen. As before in the world of men, the message has been given, the example set, and as before, history repeats itself.” (Robert Crosbie, “Misconceptions of Theosophy,” “Theosophy” magazine, December 1912)

“There is no record anywhere of men in general recognizing a “Christ” when he came. Perhaps He has been here and gone, after leaving His teaching for the few to profit by and perpetuate for further generations. Such things have happened, and are therefore most likely; besides which there is much evidence of the fact.” (Robert Crosbie, “Questions and Answers,” “Theosophy” magazine, January 1913)

“The position assumed by this Magazine is a very definite one. In plain words, it holds with regard to the Theosophical Movement that the Personages known to the world as H. P. Blavatsky and William Q. Judge were merely the mortal garments in and through which the Masters known to be concerned in the re-presentation of the Ancient Wisdom [i.e. the Master Morya and Master Koot Hoomi or Kuthumi], had communication with the world of men on this plane of being.” (Robert Crosbie, “The Position Assumed,” “Theosophy” magazine, April 1914)

“None recognized that the presence of H.P.B. and Her Message in the world was the super-phenomenon of the ages; that what She wrote was the Voice of the Master in the world of men; that She was the Master in human guise and garment, as Her words were the Master’s Message in human form and speech.” (Robert Crosbie, “Masters and Their Message,” “Theosophy” magazine, October 1914)

“Those who represented the Masters of the Great Lodge were not casual students attracted to a philosophy, nor mere tyros in occultism, but Initiates – masquerading in the mortal garments known as H. P. Blavatsky and William Q. Judge. This is a matter of knowledge to living persons to-day. To help all who will to the personal realization of that knowledge is but a carrying on of Their work on the lines They laid down. To understand Them, and to place one’s self where help may be given, necessitates a study and assimilation of the teachings They have recorded for the benefit of humanity – a following of the Path They showed.” (Robert Crosbie, “Masters and Their Message,” “Theosophy” magazine, April 1915)

“It is significant that there were two Masters spoken of as the Real Founders of the Movement [i.e. M. and K.H.] and that two represented Them in the world. So far as any student knows to the contrary the personages known as H. P. B. and W. Q. J. were merely the masks through which the Two Real Founders directly contacted the world of men.” (Robert Crosbie, “Masters and Their Message,” “Theosophy” magazine, July 1915)

“H. P. Blavatsky . . . The tenant occupying that body really left it when it was wounded unto death on the field of battle [i.e. at Mentana in 1867], and another Entity by agreement took it. That incoming Entity was one of “Those who know,” one of Those who had reached perfection, and who used that body for the purposes of the work of the great Lodge of Masters in the world. William Q. Judge was another. . . . a Being of higher knowledge and attainment can, by choice or by agreement enter a body, borrow a body, when the former tenant is leaving it. These two Beings did not come into human life through the door of birth as we all have; they entered in with knowledge, and immediately on entering began to train those borrowed bodies to respond to their own attainments and requirements.” (Robert Crosbie, “In Memory of H. P. Blavatsky,” White Lotus Day talk, published posthumously in “Theosophy” magazine in 1920)

“H. P. Blavatsky . . . we understand her to have been one of the Masters — for, even if we think she was less than that, we must admit that she was very much higher in knowledge than the rest of the world — . . . I suggest what is not beyond the possibilities, one of the Masters masquerading in a mortal body becoming in all things like unto us, . . .

“It has been said that there were two Masters who were the real founders of the Theosophical Movement and Society in that cycle marked by the ending of the first five thousand years of Kali Yug, which denoted a renaissance of spiritual inquiry and uplift to the minds of men, and when a sound basis must be given for the people of then and of the oncoming generation. We also know that H. P. B. and Mr. Judge worked together from the first to last, actually supporting each other in every way. These things go together. They were the two who represented those Masters in the world and put into operation what is greater than any Society: the Theosophical Movement, . . . If it is true that we have to discern what we do not know by correspondence with what we do know, it would not be a far stretch to admit, that, perchance, two Masters were in the world working through ordinary human bodies. . . .

“There must be here, at the present time, those who are able to assimilate the knowledge that was presented; who have the courage and endurance to carry on the work; who recognize the nature of those whose will keeps it in being all the time. For, although those bodies have passed away as all bodies do, there yet remains the force, the knowledge, the very Presence of those beings who once occupied them.

“In the recognition of those beings we should find a key to the whole Movement, — a key to the philosophy which they delivered. It would open many doors to us which now are closed. Taking it merely as a theory, thinking from that basis, reading with that idea in mind, applying with that thought, we would find knowledge springing up spontaneously within us; the real nature — our inner nature would be aroused to a finer and higher perception; and we would soon know just what we are and our place in the great work. The nature of those Beings would then be open to us; the similar nature in ourselves, which we all possess, would then be in accord with those higher natures. Their very presence in the world was an opening to a great force — an opportunity for everyone; the force that flows from true spiritual perception and knowledge is there for everyone able to open his spiritual eyes even just a little, and follow the lines indicated.” (Robert Crosbie, “In Memory of William Q. Judge,” WQJ Day talk given on 21st March 1915, published posthumously in “Theosophy” magazine, March 1922)

“All this we shall find out, if we move along the Path shown. For it is not an uncharted path. Remember, others have been along that path before us. They are our Elder Brothers — Jesus, for example; Buddha for another; and all those who came at different times as Saviours to the many different peoples. They had all acquired the Language of the Soul. They all had a common body of knowledge. They come amongst men from time to time, as the intelligence of humanity progresses, and give out as much of that knowledge as the then existing state of humanity permits. They came again in our own time; and greater than Those who so came there has not been. Why should anyone say that? Because other Saviours came to separate and distinct peoples, but the Message of Theosophy is not to any one nation, not to any one class of beings, but to the whole world.” (Robert Crosbie, “The Language of The Soul,” “The Friendly Philosopher” p. 347-348, also in the book “Universal Theosophy”)

“The case of “borrowed bodies” in a specific sense, when a body must be deserted by its inmate, and is taken over by one who knows how to do so, and who can use it for the benefit of mankind, follows the same occult law. There must be some karmic relationship between the one who is through with a particular body, and the one who is able to revivify it for a high purpose.” (“Everyday Questions on Patanjali’s Yoga Aphorisms,” “Theosophy” magazine, October 1947)

“Undeniably, it is startling to many to think that perhaps we had some of the Masters working directly among us, with us, and for us, and that we judged them as though they were actuated by our small and selfish motives. This might not be true for us, but it is true for many who are now very much in the public eye as Theosophical exponents, and who appear to be still oblivious of the fact. That this lack of discrimination should lead to all sorts of mistakes and wrong steps is easily perceived, as also that many who came later were blinded by those who claimed to know. It must be clear to every one who has done much Theosophical reading and study of H. P. B. and W. Q. J., that the failure of the T. S. [i.e. Theosophical Society] lay principally in that non-recognition, for it implies a lack of comprehension and power to apply the philosophy given.” (Robert Crosbie, “The Friendly Philosopher” p. 63)

“We have read, remembered, and applied but little the theosophical writings of H. P. B. and W. Q. J., if we do not already understand that Masters do not come among men in Their natural physical bodies at the present time because it would be subversive of the ends They have in view; and that whether They, on rare occasions, do come among men, or men are taken into Their presence, it cannot be done without elaborate precautions. Why? Because the matter of Their bodies is electrical, in a sense and to a degree that we can but faintly imagine by thinking of dynamos.

“When, therefore, people express a desire to “see a Mahatma,’ they really do not seem to understand what it is they ask for. The real Mahatma is not His physical body, and how can they, by their physical eyes, hope to see that which transcends that sight, even supposing they are taken into His physical presence? All they could see would be a human body, in appearance more or less like other human bodies, which they might or might not “believe” to be the physical body of a Master. All that they would recognize would be a human body. Another thing that we might learn, if we would, from both Isis Unveiled and the Secret Doctrine, and, as well, from what is recorded of Jesus and all other Messengers of The Lodge, that at cyclic periods the Masters do, nevertheless, come among men and mingle with them freely. But they come in borrowed bodies. They ‘become in all things like one of us,’ and again we are deceived by appearances.

““The neophyte may meet an Adept in the flesh, may live in the same house with him, and yet be unable to recognize him. For no nearness in space, no closeness of relations, no daily intimacy, can do away with the inexorable laws which give the Adept his seclusion.” [Quote from “Light on The Path”] And why not? Because those laws are spiritual and psychical, not physical or personal. We might “believe’’ we were living with an Adept, or we might be utterly incredulous of the fact. What would we know about it? Col. Olcott, A. P. Sinnett, Mrs. Besant, and many others lived in the same house with “H. P. B.” Some thought she was a medium. Some thought she was a “chela.” Some thought she was sometimes “used” by the Masters and sometimes not. Others thought she was a fraud, a charlatan; others that she was self-deceived; others that she was a powerful “mesmerizer,’ and so on, endlessly. The same persons thought one thing about her at one time and next day something else. What they “believed” she was, that she was — to them. And they held the same ideas in regard to W. Q. Judge. He was this, he was that, he was the other thing, in their wise opinion. And how could they be mistaken? Were they not in the same house with him? Were they not in daily intimacy with him?

“But H. P. B. put Mr. Judge in an altogether different relation with herself than any other. Him she authorized to speak for her. Him she authorized to act for her. Him she gave literal carte blanche of confidence — in speech, in testimony, and in writing over her own signature. This is true of no one else. If any claims the contrary. let him produce the evidence. Why did H. P. B. take this attitude toward W. Q. J.? Perhaps she recognized what was there behind the mask, the ‘‘personality” which the others saw; behind the ‘‘borrowed body,” if you will. And Mr. Judge placed H. P. B. in an altogether different category from any of the others. She was no “medium,” no “person,” no part good and part bad, part wise and part foolish, part trusted and part untrustworthy “agent” of the Masters, to be accepted in this and rejected in that, to be damned with faint praise or denied altogether, as appearances might indicate; she was none of these things to him. And why not? Perhaps, again, he recognized the Being who was working in and through a “borrowed body.” Perhaps each recognized in the other “the nature and powers,” the “higher faculties and spiritual knowledge” which both possessed, and which none of the other students were able to recognize because they had them not, and could therefore only “believe” one thing and another, according to appearances. . . .

““First deserve, then desire,” said one of those very Masters, in writing to all aspirants for Chelaship ; and the Voice of the Silence gives the first two requisites to finding the Master and opening up conscious communication with Him, whether on the physical, astral, or any other plane: “To live to benefit mankind is the first step; to practice the six glorious virtues is the second.” The Master cannot be recognized through any other process or processes.” (Robert Crosbie, “Recognition,” “Theosophy” magazine, February 1919)

“To understand the real H.P.B. is difficult and it does take time. Her avatara, appearance or personality was and is apt to mislead. The Masters Themselves wrote of her and Her and it requires some viveka [i.e. discrimination and discernment] to evaluate Their words and accord them the right place. What was hidden behind the “peculiar mannerisms” of her personality? She had a purpose every time – to help, to instruct, to guide, to protect; always an unselfish purpose founded upon Compassion Absolute. . . . The safe way to proceed is from the Teachings to the Teacher. No doubt H.P.B. baffles, but every time calm consideration reveals her as a Being of Light and Sacrifice, the Justice which is Mercy and Mercy ever just. . . . She did not belong to our Kali Yuga or even to our Fifth-Race evolution, though she was affected by both. An incarnation like hers cannot be evaluated by our rules, our cycles, etc. Herein is a clue to understand her. Her motives and methods were hers, deliberate in wisdom and in compassion.” (B. P. Wadia, “Extracts from Unpublished Letters”)

“It is quite true that we may be too insistent in speaking our beliefs in regard to H. P. B. and W. Q. J., for that course followed incontinently would serve to arouse opposition in some and a supposition in others that belief in Them was a sine qua non — either of which would defeat the end in view [Note: It is thus extremely important that if one does give credence to what is being presented here – and there are quite a few, even in the ULT today, who do not – one should not turn it into any type of dogma, nor imply that those not holding the same view are not as devoted or loyal or true to the Masters and the Movement, etc. In other words, be humble, restrained, and sensible about it and do not “cast pearls before swine,” as Jesus would say]. One’s own conviction may be given when found advisable, and the reasons for it presented; just as in the Ocean [i.e. “The Ocean of Theosophy” by William Judge], the Masters are presented in the very first chapter. For without Them as the Custodians of Ancient Wisdom to what could we assign the existence and appearance of Theosophy? It is the Message that the world needs, and in consideration of that, the question as to who brought the Message naturally follows. Understanding of the Message brings a comprehension of the nature of the Messengers.” (Robert Crosbie, “The Friendly Philosopher” p. 173-174)

“She was not an ordinary person, but, in our opinion, one of that class of beings known as “divine incarnations,” of which perhaps the best example known to the Western world is that of Jesus of Nazareth. It was said of him, that “he became in all things like unto us,” which means that he occupied a body of the race, subject to the limitations of bodies of that time. He was not that body, the latter being but an instrument borrowed from that people.” (Robert Crosbie, “Answers to Correspondents,” “Theosophy” magazine, March 1919)

At the start of the present article, we saw how H. P. Blavatsky often used the term “Incarnation” as a synonym for “Avatar.” We are all incarnations of our own Ego but we are not all Avatars in the special and technical sense of the term. An Avatar is, however, an Incarnation – an incarnation of a higher Entity into a comparatively normal, ordinary, mortal body, in order to achieve a great and self-sacrificing purpose for the good of all, even if it may take many centuries for the work done to blossom to full fruition. In other places as well, HPB speaks of Avatars as “Incarnations.” With this in mind, we shall close with a remarkably revealing and very little-known statement by her – perhaps the one and only time she ever said such a thing in writing – in a private letter to Prince Dondukov-Korsakov of Russia, written in October 1882. She gives examples of how Westerners get routinely prevented from passing into Tibet, regardless of what official capacity or professional role those Westerners might have. She then says, without any further elaboration:

“Then why did they let me pass, one might ask?
One word gives the answer to this: I am an Incarnation.”

~ * ~

This article may have raised more questions about various things. Please make use of the site search function (the magnifying glass symbol at the top of the page) and visit the Articles page to see the complete list of over 400 articles covering all aspects of Theosophy and the Theosophical Movement. A few which relate closely to this one and shed further light on this subject are: Who are you, Madame Blavatsky?, Theosophy on The New Age of Aquarius, By Their Fruits or By Their Claims?, Who was William Quan Judge?, Understanding The Importance of William Q. Judge (a collection of HPB’s statements about WQJ), The Man Who Rescued Theosophy (about Robert Crosbie), The Occult Life of B. P. Wadia, Masters of Wisdom: Outwardly Mortal, Inwardly Immortal, and The Centennial Effort of The Masters of Wisdom.